In the lead up to the release of the Xbox One and the PS4 there has been much wailing about resolutions and whatnot. I think this is perfectly normal and fair. People are in the process of deciding which console to buy and I think consumers are perfectly within their rights to want to discuss this stuff. But how much do visuals matter to you when choosing your next console?
Is it your primary concern? Is it a secondary issue?
For me the main issue is exclusive titles: what games will I be playing on one console and (perhaps more importantly) what games will I not be able to play on that console. Weirdly enough the technically ‘underpowered’ consoles have won the last three generations in terms of unit sales, so I wonder just how important it is.
That being said, I think it is a legitimate issue and a legit concern — I just want to know how important it is to you.
Comments
81 responses to “Tell Us Dammit: How Much Do Next Gen Visuals Matter To You?”
I’d love to play a photo realistic Uncharted game, but at the same time it’s the level design, cinematography, story, gameplay, music and production values that keeps me coming back to that series. Prettier graphics is just the icing on the freakin’ cake! I agree with Serrels, exclusives!
Nought. I was actually more concerned with the news today that you can’t stream media from your PC to a PS4
This did concern me a bit. I guess it a something that can be added later but that feature is what made my PS3 one of the most used device in the house.
Same here, I’m pretty pissed off about it being left out of PS4. But at the end of the day I’ll just keep the PS3 plugged in, stick it behind the TV and keep using it for media purposes until Sony hopefully see the light and patch this functionality into the PS4 later.
Indeed. If Apple couldn’t make their formats succeed by restricting the more common formats on the iPod, then Sony doesn’t stand a chance in hell of making their proprietary formats succeed by restricting formats on a home console, which will almost certainly be within metres of a device that CAN play mp3 files, while the iPod had the advantage of being a portable player.
You can’t stream media from a PC?
Wait, what?
…
WHY NOT????
Probably because Sony has fingers in the music and movie industry as well as having their own online stores and 99% of what gets streamed is pirated?
Although that wouldn’t explain why it won’t play audio CDs.
I think that actually does explain why it won’t play audio CDs. From the FAQ:
What is Music Unlimited?
The music destination on PlayStation 4. Music Unlimited is a cloud-based, ad-free music subscription service that enhances and simplifies music discovery from an extensive catalog of millions of songs. On PS4, users can create the soundtrack of their choice, to listen to while playing their favorite games. On the go, the service can be enjoyed on a variety of portable devices such as PS Vita, Android phones and tablets, and iOS devices such as iPhone.
Having to pay a subscription fee for the privilege of listening to music I already own has soured me on this console, hopefully common sense prevails and the functionality is patched in.
…..it won’t play cds? now that is truly baffling to me (granted, most music these days is acquired online -legally or not- but still, it’s a bit baffling)
Cost of getting CD player to work per unit, vs. proportion of people who will use it, and impact on the total product price.
Not cost-effective, drop it.
Sony already knows how to make CD players work, they’ve been in the business for a while. And they also know that the hardware is cheap as chips (less than $5). Cost effectiveness isn’t a factor.
It is when you look at utility for the average person.
They would bump up the price of production by $5. Now they either take that cost hit, and retain their current RRP, or they bump their RRP up and pass on the price.
Knowing that 99% of people won’t use it, and it’ll eat $5 per unit into their profits, it isn’t cost effective. It’s the only factor.
If it was a selling point, and would make a few more people buy the unit, they would do it. It won’t though, or it won’t get enough people too. So it’s not in there.
Yeah, but that 1% of people who are turned off by it have just spent their $500 elsewhere, which nets them exactly $0 overall, with fewer consoles sold and money potentially going to competitors.
@shane
Yep, that’s true. But once again, lets say $5 additional cost per unit multiplied against the total sales of people who don’t care (or aren’t aware, and they are indeed the majority) minus the profit associated with the proportion of people who will no longer buy it solely for that reason (which, I think you’d be hard pressed to count them on your fingers and toes), and you’re still looking at numbers which tilt in the favor of not including it, just because it imposes a greater cost on the total unit, and reduces profitability.
It’s also worth remembering that they don’t make profits on these consoles initially. At all. So cost minimization is very important.
It’s the same underlying economics which leads to backwards compatibility not being included, although the $ associated with the components and costs and the numbers of people who care are of a much different volume.
Although, that said, given the only “competitors” offering backwards compatibility is PC and Wii U, Sony knew they could scrap it and not really “leak” any sales.
Yeah – I’m gutted by this. On the one hand, I don’t care for MS’s TV push, on the other hand, at least the xbone is a capable media centre.
Wait…What?! It can’t? ASDF
wow, that’s a massive massive fail…….
Not a jot. Gameplay will always trump graphics for me.
Edit: Expanding on this point – I appreciate playing games on my PC because I can turn the graphics DOWN. I get frustrated when performance detracts from the gameplay on a console because of the shiny graphics.
Exactly my thoughts. I’m sick and tired of every game being judged purely on the biggest, prettiest explosions. It’s like Michael Bay movies – yeah, it looks pretty, but there’s no content.
Sure, I don’t want games to look blocky like the late 90’s, but for me, gameplay and story will always come out on top.
I liked this quote from J.J Abrams:
It doesn’t need to be too pretty when your screen is 4/5ths lens flare at all times.
thats why i love the wiiU. Sure there are hardly and 3rd party developers and that means ill have to either get an xbox or PS. But nintendo games, for me, are by far the funnest. Graphics are great and impressive but when it comes down to it i really don’t care about them.
Console gaming has always sacrificed graphics in return for convenience and comfort. This generation will be no different. I prefer the feel of the XB1 controller over the PS4, and know more people interested\buying an XB1, so that’s my platform of choice. I’ll get a PS4 once they have exclusive titles out I’m interested in, but until then, I’ll be happy with the One. If I want cutting edge graphics, I’ll move to my gaming PC, or maybe move it to the TV if I can be bothered. Others have their own reasons, and they’re more than welcome to have different understandings\opinions 🙂
The overall power of the hardware does matter to me a bit, simply because whatever machine I get is what I’m going to be gaming on for the next 5 – 10 years (depending on how long they choose to drag out this next generation for). So more powerful hardware means we get a bit longer out of it before it starts to really show its age.
It’s not going to be the be-all and end-all of my decision – I’m going PS4 because Sony’s history of producing quality exclusives means there are going to be more games there that I don’t want to miss out on. The fact it’s a bit more powerful than XBone doesn’t really matter that much, nor would it matter if the positions were reversed. If there was a really significant gap (like the one between Wii U and the 2 new consoles) then it would be an issue and I’d probably have gone XBone in that situation.
It’s important to me, otherwise why would I upgrade to next gen? GTA 5 has created a new benchmark in the intense detail of what a game should have, for console games on old gen consoles. So the next step would be improving on visual components.
I must admit, I was hoping for close to if not the same visuals as PC.
It’s not a purchasing decision for me, but I’m still excited to see what they’ll be able to do with next gen. I’m especially hoping they’ll be able to do something great with character faces (which sort of suck in the current gen). Having characters be able to express emotions through subtle facial expressions would be awesome, and can only be good for story (which is what I mainly care about with games).
You should checkout LA Noire. They used some sort of face capture, so that whilst the faces aren’t much more detailed, they have the full range of facial emotions.
It looks a little odd at first, probably due to the “uncanny valley” effect, but I much prefer it to the plastic faces of most games.
As far as multiplats go, it bothers me substantially. I see no reason to buy multiplats on any platform other than PC if consoles can’t render them in 1080p natively. As for exclusives, it would have to be quite an exclusive to get me to buy a console just for one game.
Pokemon sold a bajillion copies and the 3DS does not have amazing graphics.
League of Legends is the most played game in the world (excluding mobile and Facebook games) and that isn’t a huge step up from Warcraft 3.
Super mega awesome fantastico graphics are there for fanboys to use as artillery in their console war while the PC Master Race sits high atop their mountain and scoffs at the peons.
Anyhow, launch titles mean diddly. Just compare The Last of Us to Resistance: Fall of Man. Developers can squeeze a lot out of hardware once they know what they’re doing with it. Then again, just look at the new Mario game coming out. The Wii U has the graphical power of a calculator and yet it still looks fantastic because the art direction is fantastic.
Not really a good comparison, because what does the 3DS have to compete with? The Vita (which is more powerful, yes, but is also tanking horribly in sales) and smartphones.
I agree with just about everything else though, apart from the quip about the Wii U’s graphical power. It’s more powerful than many people give it credit for. Will it compete with the PS4 and Xbone? Well…no, but that’s not really the point.
The point with Pokemon is that people will buy a game on any platform, regardless of the graphics, if the game is good enough (or scratches the right itch). There are people who bought a 3DS just to play Pokemon.
As for the quip with the Wii U, I know that it’s actually fairly capable. I just felt like a little hyperbole. The point remains that solid art direction goes so much further than raw graphics horsepower when it comes to making a game look pretty.
IMHO, if next gen graphics werent an issue for games, what would be the point of new consoles?
cause isnt the big diff with new consoles just better hardware to make shit look pretty?
And the story and plot is just software side that can be produced on any console?
Battlefield finally being able to support 64 players on console is a pretty good reason to move to NextGen that isn’t related to graphics. It’s the one reason I’ve held out on buying a current gen version today.
I agree – that and ‘The Crew’ having a map the size of the United States are actual selling points for a new generation. The graphics don’t look all that different to me
Buy a PC if you care so much about graphics. Its not that much more and will be cheaper in the long run buying CD keys and not paying for online services.
They look the same and are perfectly fine as an upgrade from 360/PS3.
I stopped playing the Wii because my eyes got used to playing in HD, but when you’re talking XBOX 360 vs PS3 or PS4 vs XBOX One I don’t notice the difference at all. Side by side videos feature nothing that I’d pick up on if they weren’t showing me them together and highlighting the differences. I played a ton of XBOX 360 games last generation that probably looked better on the PS3, but I wasn’t playing them on the PS3 at the same time so I was completely unaware.
Really, if I cared about realistic graphics and all that I’d be comparing them to reality not other consoles, and the PS4, XBOX One and PC graphics all look like garbage compared to reality.
Performance > Gameplay > fidelity
I much prefer games with crisp edges, screen native resolutions and solid 60FPS. There is nothing worse than a game that claims to have the most badass graphics that runs at a lower res than native, barely hits 30FPS during the action and has more such rough edges you could use them as sandpaper.
The frames per second is the biggest thing though, I don’t mind if your game is lower res, but please don’t choke to 10FPS during heavy action, it really kills the game.
That’s why I love Blizzard & Valve. Generally very nicely optimised games 🙂
As much as they did last gen. So somewhere around “not at all”.
So many games that people would go on about how good the graphics were, I’d look at them and just think they looked ugly. Give me a cool art style over high-end graphics any day.
As long as the increased graphics means no loading times on open world games, NPCs that’re tracked no matter what you’re doing and that you can see the impact of your gameplay all through a game such as building destruction, then yeah, graphics are important to me. AI moreso though
To be honest, I’m not really ready for a new generation of consoles yet. The steps between the previous few gens seemed larger and I was excited for the future and the changes that the new gens brought, but this time I’m still very happy with the current consoles.
The new consoles don’t seem like as big of a step up in any department, and certainly not visually. We’re at a point now where a lot of these new independent games are wowing us with their gameplay, stories and charm and these kind of things are far more important to me than how realistic the latest shooting games can look.
I’ll be honest, I want the next gen consoles to have some graphical heft. I consider it a major part of the next gen transition, along with more immersive storytelling and hopefully the perfection of the open world story/exploration balance which seems to improve every year. I’m not THAT concerned, if I want a really pretty game I’ll play it on my PC like I have been doing, but I want my console exclusives to be competitively pretty, so long as they stack up in the more important areas as well.
Gamplay > Story > Graphics
Agree, and as a sub-bit-thing to game play: AI
So tired of predictable damd arse AI.
For me: Story>Art Design>Characters>Gameplay>Graphics>>>>>Multiplayer
How much do inferior graphics mean to me? Nothing. I usually get a console for the gameplay and exclusives. In fact the last console I got was primarily for Blu-Ray….so there you go :/
Frame rate
I just want a stable frame rate and the end to slideshow games (ala Skyrim on PS3)
This.
If the increase in power of next-gen consoles was used for nothing but frame-rate stability, I wouldn’t mind.
I want to see the developers use the entra power to create a distinct visual style instead of counting pixels.
I saw the footage of a PC running BF4 at 1080P and the PS4 running it at 1080P. The PC footage looked a little bit sharper (the textures were nicer) and cleaner, but really, how much attention do you pay this stuff when you are slapping C4 packs onto the side of vehicles, leaving them for the other team and shouting “birthday cake!”? Not a lot.
Beautiful, detailed, liquid smooth graphics for me is only a small part of the overall experience. I don’t sit in a darkened room pants down admiring my 4k screen setup. I’m all for fun and exclusives, not the eye candy. I’d replace my 5 year old laptop if I cared about that.
Pretty interesting question. So many people are eager to say they don’t put graphics first, yet will turn around and beat on WiiU for being behind on power. Visuals though… I’m not about to say I don’t put visuals first, it means a hell of a lot. Exclusive titles and visuals aren’t mutually exclusive – I prefer Nintendo because of their exclusives, but the visuals of those have a lot to do with why I prefer them. HMMMMM.
as long as exclusives look good and play well i’ll be happy… i’ll just get multi platform titles on PC because i know it’ll look far superior and probably be smoother…
i can’t say i’m not disappointed with the performance and graphics of the next gen consoles… but at the same time i’m only getting them for exclusives this time round…
I gave up on the Xbone when all the crappy stuff was announced with it (always online etc etc) I know that’s all been removed, but it left a foul taste in my mouth that can’t be removed just yet.
Yeah I wouldn’t want to invest in a company that thinks of it’s customers with that kind of disdain.
You don’t exactly have many alternatives. Sony isn’t your friend either. Nintendo maybe, but you’d miss out on a lot of good titles.
Visuals matter, but not in terms of the tech specs. I’d much prefer games with a coherent, interesting, vibrant sense of design that run at lower res over those that display the same old muddy shades of brown and green and crag-faced meathead marines in 60fps 1080p. Use the power of those new consoles to give us interesting, exciting new worlds to explore, not just the same old boring places with smoother edges.
I wouldn’t have said it matters that much to me, but obviously it does because I actually dropped a fair chunk of change on gaming rig this morning because I couldn’t stand playing FarCry 3 on low on my laptop any more. The lighting in particular was driving me nuts – it was so on/off with the shadows.
I just realised I didn’t really answer the actual question. I guess because I’m on PC, the graphics differences on the consoles aren’t as important as the games. Xbone has a decent looking launch lineup, but my experience with the 360 tells me they’ll be front heavy. I’ll probably buy a PS4 with the first Naughty Dog title.
I’ll only be getting the Xbox One because (personally) I think it has the better exclusives. I’m not getting it at launch though, only when it has a Halo game.
I have a gaming PC, if I want to play games native 1080p at 60FPS, I’ll just play my PC.
They haven’t been released, and both systems are already running on inferior hardware, it’s no surprise that they announced all this crap about “upscaled 720p/900p” whatever. If you care so much about spending $500/$600 on a console based solely on graphics and frame rates, spend that money on a PC. You don’t need to spend $2000 on a “good one”, that’s just a myth.
Important, but not number one thing. I build PC’s for ultimate visuals.
Isn’t that what the next gen consoles are all about, prettier graphics?
Prettier yes but they will also allow much larger game worlds and better AI.
hmm colour me skeptical, but didn’t they promise pretty much the same from the ps2 gen to the ps3 gen, and I can’t really recall anything on ps3 that wouldn’t have been possible on the ps2 as far as large game worlds and AI go. Apart from shiny, what REALLY was a step up from ps2?
Does anyone have an example? This is an honest question.
If anything I feel it was a step down, I feel there was a lot more variety of games on the ps2.
(Not having a go at you of course PiratePete, I’m of course skeptical of the PR departments of MS and Sony, not you.)
How about MMO’s? Games like Heavenly Sword (old example, but relevant) which had hundreds of characters on screen to attack at once? How about GTAV, with all of its many systems running in the background? LA Noire, where a significant portion of the gameplay hinged on paying attention to subtle facial animations?
There could have been “cut down” versions of these games which could theoretically have run on PS2, but it wouldn’t have been the same game. A leap in console power means all aspects of gaming – not just visuals – are capable of more. And games will be designed which would not have been possible without the ability to leverage that extra horsepower.
Uncharted is probably a good example, you couldn’t have massive set pieces that moved and collapsed like that on PS2 hardware.
Another one is destructible environments, previously if you destroyed something it would play a preset animation that would always make it break in the same way, Today we can have physics where the destruction happens based on what destroyed it and what direction ETC it came from.
The more power we get, the more dynamic the worlds we play in should become.
I also believe that in the future we wont need instanced towns/dungeons/houses in Elder Scrolls games.
Immersion SHOULD be improved with extra power like this but in the end its up to the studios 🙂
For me its not system seller as I had a 360 and PS3 and I am getting a XBOne and PS4 this time. While graphics are not as important as gameplay and story to me, for a multiplatform where story and game play are identical, and I have the choice with both systems, sure I am going to get the one that looks better. Who wouldn’t?
The only caveat to that is for online games where more friends are on one system than another. Ill go with who I want to play with over graphics.
I care. Pixelation, pop in, lack of draw distance and clipping suck.
The power increase from ps3 to ps4 is very justified.
Uncharteds moving level set pieces would not work on PS2 so look forward to what they think of next.
If you want the best graphics, you play on PC. You buy a console to play the exclusives you are interested in.
And a raft of other reasons. But I appreciate the sentiment.
no
I play on consoles because of convenience
I have a three-year old PC, 8Gb of RAM and I downloaded Typing Of The Dead Overkill from steam last night – it runs at about 8-10 frame per second. And I have no idea how to make it run better
But House of The Dead Overkill plays perfectly on my 8-year old tech PS3, and so does the Wii version that I have
So, graphics mean nothing. A great gameplay experience is what i want, and I cant get that with a PC displaying a low-tech game like TOFD:OK at 8-10 fps
Considering these are NEXT GENERATION machines that will be with us for the next decade (supposedly) then YES, I want an amazing experience and amazing graphics. This will get better with time as developers understand the machine architecture better but, I want a true Next Gen experience.
Remember the jump from Mario on SNES to Mario on N64…..it was another world. True Next Gen. I want to experience that again.
I’m not sure you’re going to get it until true VR is nailed down, consumer-friendly, and awesome. There’s only so much you can do with a flat panel, unfortunately – and I don’t think a generational leap like that of 2D to 3D will happen until the delivery medium evolves as well. Like you, I can’t wait for that to happen.
Considering the most recent games I’ve been playing are Gone Home and Volgarr the Viking, I’d say visuals rank pretty low on my agenda. Technical visuals that is, art direction is KEY. Much rather see the extra grunt go towards better populating worlds (eg. more zombies in DR3) faster loading and better AI.
I’m always constantly stunned at how much bigger a game can yet, whilst still improving a graphics engine. GTA V is a great recent example of that.
Graphics are important, but I think to real gamers (best description I can use) I agree with the majority here: Gameplay trumps Graphics.
We only have to go back one generation to see the substantial difference that graphics have come. This also tells us there is plenty more advancement to go if they can improve something in such short time. But I’m happy with the graphics as they are – maybe because I haven’t seen what IS capable in 5-10 years time. Maybe we’re that part of gaming generation that find what we have so mind-blowing compared to the 90s and 80s, when people back then looked at their games graphics as mind-blowing. Everyone remembers seeing Zelda, GoldenEye of Super Mario for the first time on N64 and being blown away.
I think graphics will always be important to gamers. Often conversations are, “How much better does this Gears of War game look than the last one?” and they appeal to people, they look it up, they love it, they buy it. However you have a game like Skyrim – graphics are a giant leap from Oblivion, but so was everything else. Scale, gameplay, content. People would’ve bought the game if it only looked more polished than Oblivion, because those games have appeal to gamers in everything else: gameplay & content. It’s why Morrowind & Oblivion were/are still being played to this day (although you can argue that Elder Scrolls & GTA are also massive franchises with a massive fan base too).
Gameplay/story always trumps: Minecraft? Arcade games on PSN/Xbox? Great graphics no doubt cost a lot for developers, which is why indie games focus greatly on gameplay elements that make them successful and popular. And then, it made me think about the COD series. The graphics are generally on par with one another, minor improvements with each release. Gameplay is all but the same, generally content is added to improve. Yet each year it is the bestseller. Perhaps Activision have found a gameplay mechanism that has already reached its peak, just the popularity/demand (as sales show) is still interested for the type of FPS it caters to.
Graphics, to me, will always be important. But it never is the factor that lasts beyond the trailer, or the first level. It’s how everything else works that determines the games longetivity on the store shelf and in everyones consoles. It’s not graphics that determine if Watchdogs will still be played 1 year, 5 years and 10 years from now.
Bluray and 1080p HDTVs are now the default option. If I’m buying into a console environment that will last eight years and they can’t handle themselves in an environment that is old as dirt (1080p environment), I’m not going to bother until way way down the track.
I’ll take better graphics when I can get them, which is why I try to buy multiplatform games on PC where possible (plus it’s cheaper)
Gameplay will always trump graphics though. It’s not fun playing a beautiful game when it’s nothing but quicktime events and cutscenes.
I still thrill over a 2D game with lovely visuals (See: Vanillaware or the new Rayman games) so any marketing saying that the PSBox 41 can render 3 bajillionty tessellations with NURBs and has the latest in raytracing and subsurface scattering means nothing to me. I just want a game that appeals to my visual aesthetics but has crazy cool gameplay and enthralling lore and characters. My excitement for this gen is not in the GPU, but the CPU and PPU and MPU (Yes, it’s a Cowboy BeBop reference) and their ability to open new ways of maneuvering around the world, new ways of interacting with people, and new ways of interacting with the environments. It’s going to be a really disappointing generation if games get pretty but are still boring and uninspiring to play.
Gameplay > everything else for me.
If a game is boring, or just plain ‘not fun to play’, then it doesn’t matter one iota how pretty it looks. Take recent example of Rome 2 for example. Maybe looks great, plays like balls, just boring and bland and no soul, thus I much prefer still playing Medieval 2 instead.
Hell I prefer to play Jagged Alliance 2 over rome 2 for the exact same reason, the game play in JA2 is top notch, even given the very aged graphics.
Same with this question, I don’t enjoy the same old same old of current gen shooters for example, and having extra shiny will not change that.
Pretty is just icing to me. But if the cake is made of crap, its still a cake made of crap, just with pretty icing on top.
Exclusives + gameplay. Found lately there’s a whole lot more gameplay out there in some smaller titles – Rogue Legacy is a great example.
Not even in the slightest.
GFX have to play some role in your decision to buy or upgrade to the next gen otherwise you may as well just stick with this gen.
Not true, The only ‘technical underdog’ that won in unit sales was the wii, but that isnt what is in discussion right now you are comparing the xbone to the ps4, looking at last gen, the PS3 as of right now has sold 1-2 million more units then the 360, SO please do not make this out to be a pathetic puff piece for the xbone, this is 2013 HD resolutions should come as standard, NOT 720p which is what we were used to having on last gen, The Xbones hardware just isnt upto scratch, and in the long run will suffer