Standardisation - Helpful or Hurtful?

[Serebii]

A thought occurred to me the other day, when I was scrolling through the ridiculous comments in a Pokémon video on IGN where one person said that Nintendo should make a Pokémon game using the Unreal Engine.

 

It made me start thinking about how many games use that engine and, while adaptive, it somewhat limits things so the games on the engine end up looking somewhat similar.

 

Which brings me to the upcoming consoles. Both the Xbox One and Playstation 4 are running components of the same x86 architecture with only slightly different specs. While I can see this being beneficial for the developers as they can port games easier, I feel it makes the point of having two separate consoles redundant for the consumer. Especially as, over the last few years, the first party exclusives to each respective console have been few and far between, and will likely be similar across PS4 and Xbox One. The only differences will be the occasional first party game, the controller and the UI.

 

The controller standardisation also has me down as very little has changed between the last few generations. It makes me feel that things are stagnating.

 

I have always been of the belief that each console should be wildly different from the others. This encourages competition and for people to purchase the different consoles. Nintendo is certainly trying this, but MS and Sony seem to just be wanting to go for more power, which is a sad state of affairs. I have typically purchased each of the available consoles, but I have no desire to do that this generation for this reason. No longer will games be optimised for one console and there's really no point of there being two near identical consoles.

 

So I can see this being a potential issue in the long run, and it certainly is giving me pause. I feel it makes developers complacent. What do you think? Do you think that standardisation is good, or are you like me and wanting three totally different consoles?

 

Edit: Just realised I said harming or hurting, implying it's bad outright. Can a mod change it to Helpful or Hurtful?

Edited August 4, 2013 by Serebii

[Retro_Link]

I think it's a failed argument tbh.

 

You're of the opinion that each console should be wildly different to the last... that means you didn't like the Gamecube then or?... Tbh up until the Wii, Nintendo was treating console evolution exactly the same as it's competitors.

 

You could say that Sony and Microsoft evolved the online gaming scene, whilst Nintendo stagnated?

 

The Wii U has also shown that there's no point just innovating when the demand isn't there for it.

 

I agree with you that a number of 3rd Party games do share visual similarities when the same engines are used... but it's a sweeping statement and art style can account for a lot. Look at Mirror's Edge 2 for example of a next gen game using a standardised engine, but looking completely unique... so there's no reason the next generation of games will show stagnation.

 

I'm honestly completely baffled how you can say Sony's First Party efforts have been few and far between! and already they've announced several for the PS4 (Drive Club, Knack, Killzone, The Order, Infamous...) with more to be revealed. Microsoft will have their Xbone exclusive too.

 

I don't really feel standardisation is happening any more so than it has before.

 

The real issue is an over reliance to cash in on sequels. That's what's perhaps stagnating the industry... but the entire industry is guilty of that... 3rd Parties more than First.

Edited August 4, 2013 by Retro_Link

[Cube]

Standardisation of consoles does not matter at all as it does not affect competition in any way. It makes it cheaper for third party developers to work on multiple consoles.

 

Third party games should be multiplatform, unless the game is getting funded by a first party (like Bayonetta and LEGO City Undercover). Sometimes budgets don't allow for the work porting over, so this will help the situation between the PS3/XB1/PC.

 

Exclusive games are still pretty common, with the PS3 getting at least 17 this year and with over 70 in the last three years, so there's a lot of competition on that front.

[Grazza]

Standardisation happens for a reason. The wheel is round because that's the best shape for it. Game controllers have a certain form because it suits our hands. Sony and Microsoft's consoles are powerful because that's what people want.

 

I'm in favour of innovation when there's a good reason like d-pads, rumble or analogue sticks/triggers. What I'm not in favour of is forced innovation. Because unfortunately, that's why Nintendo differentiates itself so much at the moment - it feels it has to. Supposedly Nintendo's executives were very split on whether to use motion control with the Wii. They went ahead with it and it paid off, but it was entirely a business decision, not a drive to improve gaming.

 

Regarding game engines and console architecture, Sony and MS have used PC architecture and processors because time and time again developers have told them that's the easiest/best way. Why try to push water uphill? It's a similar situation with game engines. Games are taking longer and longer to develop, so what's the alternative? We can't force developers to work 24/7 for low wages, and we do want higher resolutions and better graphics, don't we? Don't get me wrong, I'm happy with what we've got at the moment, but graphical progress is perfectly natural. I'm already seeing less games of the type I like (Japanese RPGs). Whilst this is probably due to market forces, I certainly don't want it to be because developers don't have time to model their own blades of grass.

 

Shared resources and standardisation can only be helpful. When good innovation becomes possible, it'll happen. What I don't want is for companies to sit around inventing screens I can wear on my sleeve just so it's something different to the Xbox and PlayStation.

[Sheikah]

So you would rather consoles be very different, meaning we have to splash out on all 3 to get the full roster of games?

 

I'll leave it to Oxigen to reply to this one. :p

[Serebii]

So you would rather consoles be very different, meaning we have to splash out on all 3 to get the full roster of games?

 

I'll leave it to Oxigen to reply to this one. :p

Well yes :p I want there to be a point to each console. A hook to make it worth it.

 

I get I may be in the minority in this, it's just as I've typically owned each console, it's getting increasingly tiresome with them being near identical this gen

[Sheikah]

How would companies make enough money if they could only release on one console? Not all titles are mainstream/popular enough to make much cash releasing on only one unit.

[Ashley]

Arguably the next generation shows more divergence, not less. Yes, graphics are getting similar and games are being shared across some/all of the consoles, but now that those races have pretty much reached a peak, companies are going after different things.

 

The PS4 has a big focus on indie titles and the social aspect (i.e. sharing videos), in addition to Sony buying up a lot of studios for second-party games and PS Plus offering free games. Meanwhile, Microsoft are focusing more on immersion (Kinect & voice command) and integration with the home (e.g. "TV, TV, TV!"). Yeah all consoles now incorporate online media, but to varying degrees; Nintendo just has apps and the limited-release TVii (that I've actually never heard anyone talk about), Sony has apps and their own online store of TV/films and Microsoft is trying to replace the cable box.

 

To say "all the consoles are becoming the same" is to ignore what they offer outside of just playing games. Yes, games are their first focus and there are now a lot of similarities in this realm, but the industry must evolve. If they were all to just offer a gaming console with nothing on top you may have a point, but I don't feel you do given the myriad of other things video game consoles can do nowadays.

[Cube]

Kinect is a colossal hook. Claiming that the Xbox One is the same thing as the 360 with better graphics would be like saying the Wii was nothing more than a beefed up GameCube - Microsoft want it to become an integral part of gaming (whereas the PS4 camera is a little optional extra and in no way matches up to it). And that hook is probably the biggest thing putting me off the console.

[liger05]

Regarding game engines and console architecture, Sony and MS have used PC architecture and processors because time and time again developers have told them that's the easiest/best way.

 

And that for me is the most important thing. Ask the developers what they feel is best and what they need to get the best out of the skills they have.