Why don't 8th gen games look THAT much better than 7th gen? Will this also be true for 9th gen in 2020?

[zeppelin03 | 314]

On 11/23/2019 at 5:49 PM, fox said:

Think you need to adjust your bifocals  

Higher quality models and assets, better particle effects, better lighting systems like ray tracing, jump in overall resolution and performance, better draw distances with less pop in, faster loading with ssd.  These improvements make an impact.

Go back and play some of those games on older systems.  You are going janky looking characters and environments and some the fakest fire and explosion effects.  They look a lot worse than you remember.

This generation always seemed like a jump to me but it really stood out when I beat Red Dead Redemption 2.  I went back to the original through Xbox backwards compatibility and it looks rough.  Just take a look at a character models last gen compared to this gen( Horizon Zero Dawn, Spiderman,RDR2).

This gen has so much refinement. Partical effects, lighting/shadows, detailed textures have made things much more immersive.  HDR and 4k have really been great technologies to support this.

Edited November 25, 2019 by zeppelin03

[AstralSoul | 502]

Graphics have reached a kind of plateau ever since Gen 7 IMO. The jump from Gen 3 to 4 to 5 to 6 were all big jumps, but as time goes on the jump becomes less and less. At what point will graphics become impossible to improve on? When they look exactly like real life? Gen 9 consoles will look better than Gen 8 sure but it will be marginally incremental.

[RH | 4,903]

I think this was touched on but to me it's dead-obvious.  Within one cycle of game generations, we seem to always make newer TVs with higher resolutions.  So, if you increase the pixel-count by 4x, that means the next generation needs to have 4x the power to have a comparable image, scaled up to the new 4k... 8k... 16k display.  Resolution is shooting innovation in the foot.

I think it's really cool that RT ray-tracing is coming to games but if 8k displays become the norm by the end of the PS5 lifecycle, there will be a PS5 HD unit that will beefed up just so graphics won't have to be scaled up to the additional resolution.

That said, if we can ever get to a point where we're happy with a standard resolution that has pixels so small that standing 2 feet away, you can't even see them on a 70" display, then maybe we'll see wild improvements with each new generation.  Until then, upgrades only seem nominal because we need the extra horse power just to keep up with the increase in TV resolutions.

[Estil | 1,264]

So apparently the fourth/9th gen Xbox just got officially named (Xbox Series S; I don't think it makes any sense though) and honestly, unless again I'm not being a fair judge because I've mostly ignored most of modern gaming, I'm actually impressed...and are they doing like a before/after transition showing 8th gen vs 9th gen graphics?  BTW is that supposed to be a game console or an office building with no doors/windows and a roof with holes in it?

Now let's see what the PS5 can do.  I'm guessing Nintendo is sitting out the 9th gen for now, right?  I can't believe we're already about to be up to the 9th gen a little under a year from now...

Edited December 13, 2019 by Estil

[scaryice | 585]

On 11/25/2019 at 12:37 PM, zeppelin03 said:

This generation always seemed like a jump to me but it really stood out when I beat Red Dead Redemption 2.  I went back to the original through Xbox backwards compatibility and it looks rough.  Just take a look at a character models last gen compared to this gen( Horizon Zero Dawn, Spiderman,RDR2).

 

Yup, just check out the hair or clothing on the main characters on PS4 vs PS3. Look at the hair on the girls in Blue Reflection. Or the clothes of the main characters in Bloodborne or Control.

 

[Andy_Bogomil | 815]

I wouldn't be surprised on the next generation consoles if there is one major game from most franchises that is simply built upon with patches, 'seasons' and DLC. I don't like it but I feel that's pretty much gonna be the standard outside of indy games. GTA 5 would be a good example from this gen as well as a lot of online games. But next gen that will be the standard. Pump out a base game and then just build upon it as time goes on.

[RH | 4,903]

7 hours ago, Estil said:

So apparently the fourth/9th gen Xbox just got officially named (Xbox Series S; I don't think it makes any sense though) and honestly, unless again I'm not being a fair judge because I've mostly ignored most of modern gaming, I'm actually impressed...and are they doing like a before/after transition showing 8th gen vs 9th gen graphics?  BTW is that supposed to be a game console or an office building with no doors/windows and a roof with holes in it?

Now let's see what the PS5 can do.  I'm guessing Nintendo is sitting out the 9th gen for now, right?  I can't believe we're already about to be up to the 9th gen a little under a year from now...

I'm in the same boat as your opinion.  I'm more impressed than I expected to be with that XBox.

unrelated to graphics, but I'll tell you what I wish some studio would spend some time working on, and that's some form of less-rigid modeled skelaton system for movable objects like feet, hands and fingers. Instead of a very flat foot landing on a ground and being clipped, have enough "wiggle" in the joints to follow the animation for walking/griping/whatever, but still have a bit of "wiggle" in the animation to look a bit more realistic.  That's one of my biggest issues with characters in 3D.  When you pay attention, you see a lot of minor clipping because model animations, though complex, are still to rigid.

Maybe someone has already done this and I'm not saying it's easy, but I think we're at the point where that can be done.

[Sumez | 2,947]

IMO it doesn't really make sense to talk about console "generations" following the X360/PS3 generation. New console hardware at this point is just a tradition used for marketing purposes as well as an attempt to keep up with the constant upgrade of gaming PCs.

Would have to be something pretty groundbreaking to qualify a "new generation", and squeezing out a few more megaflops or whatever, to display what's essentially the exact same thing, isn't it.
I can see an argument for VR, but that's too gimmicky to feel like a generation shift. It's more like a cousin.

  

On 11/27/2019 at 9:50 PM, AstralSoul13 said:

Graphics have reached a kind of plateau ever since Gen 7 IMO. The jump from Gen 3 to 4 to 5 to 6 were all big jumps, but as time goes on the jump becomes less and less. At what point will graphics become impossible to improve on? When they look exactly like real life? Gen 9 consoles will look better than Gen 8 sure but it will be marginally incremental.

Pretty much this! The biggest difference in how much "better" (in terms of technical fidelity, not just art design) any single game looks comes down to budget moreso than hardware already at this point.
This isn't the 90s anymore, it's just a different world - and IMO the most "defining" factor of the "current" generation is how heavily the focus has changed towards lower budget titles and generally an overall smaller reliance on flexing tech/3d muscles. We've finally arrived at a place where big expensive AAA titles are expected to occupy the same territory as edgy minimalist indie games.

Edited December 13, 2019 by Sumez

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

I would be willing to bet that people that don't think graphics have improved much, or are tapering off, aren't fully considering things like longer draw distances and larger object counts, combined with the other things like shadows/lighting, water/reflection, etc.

Smoother 3D models and higher res textures are a pretty small part of the equation, when it comes to what the processor power is being spent on.

 

And that is before you get into the practical limitations of art/development budgets for a business, where "better is the enemy of done".

[Sumez | 2,947]

42 minutes ago, arch_8ngel said:

I would be willing to bet that people that don't think graphics have improved much, or are tapering off, aren't fully considering things like longer draw distances and larger object counts, combined with the other things like shadows/lighting, water/reflection, etc.

I maybe people who say this think that things like longer draw distances and larger object counts, combined with the other things like shadows/lighting, water/reflection, etc. doesn't really make a hugely noticeable difference on video games at this point, to the extend of considering it a "new generation".

When you have a way more limited basis (such as PS1 3D opposed to what would come after), these improvements make a much more noticeable difference which affects not only how games look, but also how you actually perceive them as a player, greatly impacting the experience.

At this point, it's mostly superficial polish. The current generation has some amazing looking AAA games, and even if the next generation may have slightly more amazing looking AAA games, I'm not seeing this causing any difference in how you'll remember them.

Edited December 13, 2019 by Sumez

[RH | 4,903]

Well, the 80/20 rule is starting to take serious affect.

They 80/20 rule is that you will find that given a task or a goal, you'll spend 20% of your time taking care of 80% of it.  The last 20% of your project will take 80% of your time, assuming you want it to be completed with a high degree of quality.

Game development has always been, and always will be, a series of iterative improvements.  However, we've breached that hump where 80% of the "easy" improvements have been achieved and we are about 20% away from photo-realistic games. However, that last stretch of 20% is likely going to be considerably more difficult to accomplish than that first 80%. and as @arch_8ngel pointed out, there's more that's required for that type of advancement beyond throwing better hardware at the problem. If you want truly realistic environments, you have to make extremely high-quality models, you're not going to clone many of your assets and you are going to work really, really hard to improve physics and other very fine details we see every day but never notice until they are taken away from our perceptions of reality. 

These fine details are extremely numerous and I'd dare say we've not even observed and account for all of them.  There's still a lot of science being done in the areas of, say, fluid dynamics and digitally modeled chemical reactions like cooking. Also what I pointed out about model animations having some flexibility beyond what they were specifically coded to do, so that characters can more realistically interact with their environments at a much finer level.  This stuff takes a lot of work by humans, and a lot of that work just hasn't been built into 3D engines yet. Maybe for some movie studios, but not for games.

Edited December 13, 2019 by RH

[Sumez | 2,947]

Definitely. And the further we move into these areas, the less it actually has to do with video games anymore.

The more you fine tune these details, the less noticeable each incremental step will be, and the amount of impact it'll have on the whole video game experience (with presentation and immersion being the main attributes we're looking at here I guess) will be nearly negligible.

Like I started out saying. The "traditional" impression of video game hardware segregated into "generations", which I'd say didn't really become a major thing until the fourth generation, is again becoming less and less of a thing the further ahead we move. It's a pretty typical evolution for any kind of technology really, and it's completely ok.

Edited December 13, 2019 by Sumez

[zeppelin03 | 314]

I fully expect to go back to a PS4 game in 5 years and wonder why I thought it looked good.  It happened when going back to PS3/360.  I think this gen does look that much better and expect it to continue.  I prefer 3d open worlds to 2d side scrollers so maybe I have different expectations.

[RH | 4,903]

1 minute ago, zeppelin03 said:

I fully expect to go back to a PS4 game in 5 years and wonder why I thought it looked good.  It happened when going back to PS3/360.  I think this gen does look that much better and expect it to continue.  I prefer 3d open worlds to 2d side scrollers so maybe I have different expectations.

It's funny that you say that because I actually can go back to lower resolution PS2 games and be moderately impressed. Again, they don't have to push as many pixels so they could hide a lot and get away with a lot more.

[zeppelin03 | 314]

9 minutes ago, RH said:

It's funny that you say that because I actually can go back to lower resolution PS2 games and be moderately impressed. Again, they don't have to push as many pixels so they could hide a lot and get away with a lot more.

The low resolution seems to help.  I still enjoy my catroony N64 games.  The move to realism was rough for a while.  Lots of greys and browns. 

I had a desktop in highschool in my room. One day I put a new graphics card in and realized what games could look like when pushed.  I have been interested in the looks and sound as much as the gameplay since.  Understandably it may not be as relevant to others.

[GPX | 1,369]

I think there are 2 separate angles from this topic:

1. Graphics and realism advancement.

If you look at it purely from a graphics/visual perspective, then the leap in improvements with the console generations down the line will inevitably be a decreasing one. Likely to be only limited by the creativity/skills of the artists. 

If you look at it from a game/character physics perspective, then this is where the advancements will continue to evolve and improve upon. Though it is more a matter of refinement than the era of “2D to 3D” shift (mid to late 90s).

2. Gameplay advancement.

If you emphasise your enjoyment on the basis of gameplay, then naturally you will not find as much excitement with the console upgrades as much as those who like games with better graphics and technicalities. I’ve stopped buying consoles after the Wii/X360/PS3 because I feel the gameplay hasn’t shifted enough to warrant further upgrades. 

Also, I think the other significant factor is our ageing/maturing minds. With less time to game and likely to be less impressed by the graphics/physics, we tend to steer more towards shorter-bursts gaming and games which focus more on quality gameplay than focusing on the best visuals.

[Jono1874 | 144]

7th gen was the era where enviroments became amazingly beautiful.

8th gen was the era where facial expressions became convincing enough to look decently human. Improvements were also made to enviroments.

9th gen will probably improve both on top of a much needed move for a true 60fps standard.

[Estil | 1,264]

And so both the PS5 and Xbox 4 (why not call it that instead of all these weird funny names like the Wii U that makes it look like a Wii going to or meant for college or Xbox One that sounds like the President's console/Xbox Live username?) are making these lofty claims about so-called "backwards compatablity"...I got news (and weather, and sports!) for them, unless you can play the actual discs from previous gens, it DOESN'T COUNT.

[Sega Genesis Sage | 15]

One thing I think people overlook is sound. Sound can make a game feel "next gen." Sound quality hasn't improved that much since Playstation era

 

[DoctorEncore | 3,691]

21 minutes ago, Sega Genesis Sage said:

One thing I think people overlook is sound. Sound can make a game feel "next gen." Sound quality hasn't improved that much since Playstation era

 

I don't know if that's totally true. I have overhead Atmos surround sound and the experience is phenomenal when games use it well (Gears of War is a great example).

[Sega Genesis Sage | 15]

5 minutes ago, DoctorEncore said:

I don't know if that's totally true. I have overhead Atmos surround sound and the experience is phenomenal when games use it well (Gears of War is a great example).

Oh ya, if you have the equipment for it, you can definitely see a big difference, but for the average schlub, things have kind of plateaued. The auditory jump from Xbox to Xbox 360 to Xbox One for the guy using TV speakers is pretty much a flat line. Whereas the difference between, say, Atari and SNES, or even NES and SNES is huge.

Edited December 15, 2019 by Sega Genesis Sage

[Tanooki | 4,932]

I'm stuck basically (not that I care anyway) using a 1080p level output for quality by the amount of space I can dedicate to a screen, so for me the hop from PS3 to PS4 was marginal at best.  It wasn't about the big thing, but just more more added finer details and probably some more computer power to drive some more AI in general going on.  Sound, same thing, I don't have a stereo system so the ability of the TV to pull off pseudo surround and what not really cuts off maybe some chance to hear some trickling audio between a half dozen speakers to either side because I don't have some 1000 dollar+ audio beast going on either.  So going into the coming generation, there yet again will be a marginal at best increase because for the vast majority of people they just don't have the equipment and as such, don't care, don't notice, and don't see the big deal which likely plays also into those who sit and wait years before jumping up to the next hardware.  Now that you also have these dumb PRO boxes extending the system, you'll probably have people also squatting waiting on the revisions.

[Estil | 1,264]

On 12/14/2019 at 7:01 PM, Sega Genesis Sage said:

One thing I think people overlook is sound. Sound can make a game feel "next gen." Sound quality hasn't improved that much since Playstation era

 

You may think this is silly but when I got my first non-Nintendo console in my college days (early 2000s) it was a PSOne and I was so fascinated by how the MegaMan games (which is the only reason I got it at the time) had voice acting and anime cutscenes!  Even if MM8 did have the infamous MegaGirl and Dr. Fudd   You know, the 5th gen is supposed to be the gen that transistioned from 2D to 3D gaming...it's also the gen where we transitioned to (mostly) silent (non-speaking) games to talkies!

[TDIRunner | 2,734]

On 12/14/2019 at 7:01 PM, Sega Genesis Sage said:

One thing I think people overlook is sound. Sound can make a game feel "next gen." Sound quality hasn't improved that much since Playstation era

 

You are definitely not using the right equipment if you don't think that sound has improved since the PS1 era.  Sound quality has improved significantly since then, especially since the PS3 era.  I understand that not everyone is going to invest in proper sound equipment, but that doesn't mean the improvements aren't there.  

Metal Gear Solid 4 is a great example of a game that really uses the surround sound to full effect.  Listening to that game through 7.1 surround for the first time was an amazing experience.  

[zeppelin03 | 314]

1 hour ago, TDIRunner said:

You are definitely not using the right equipment if you don't think that sound has improved since the PS1 era.  Sound quality has improved significantly since then, especially since the PS3 era.  I understand that not everyone is going to invest in proper sound equipment, but that doesn't mean the improvements aren't there.  

Metal Gear Solid 4 is a great example of a game that really uses the surround sound to full effect.  Listening to that game through 7.1 surround for the first time was an amazing experience.  

We picked up a sound bar and wireless speakers to do 7.1 with Atmos.  Makes a huge difference to the experience.  Even something like Skyrim is that much better.  The number of times an NPC made some rude comment behind me and I almost turned around to stab them. 

Dont forget about sound in your setup. It's probably more immersive than visuals when done right.