Comments on: Halo 3 and Bioshock not “Next-Gen” Games, Frontier Developments Boss Says

By: used cisco

used cisco — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 15:11:49 +0000

@joelteon7,

I couldn’t have said it better myself. Its almost like saying “next gen is about graphics” is a really LAST gen way of thinking. Games used to be so simple, that as long as they looked better, that was what was important. Now, there are SO many elements to making a good game besides graphics, games have gotten more complex, such that the value of improving the graphics beyond a certain point has decreased. Sure, improvements are expected, frame rates should always be solide, etc, but if a developer puts too much time focusing on graphics, they inevitably overlook many of the other game elements that have become just as important, if not more so. Lair is a good example of this.

By: fat guy

fat guy — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 14:57:35 +0000

you gus suck halo is next gen because it didnt flunt like gta or bio shock it grew into what itis it earned it place as #1

By: Joelteon7

Joelteon7 — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 14:50:21 +0000

The meaning has changed. In the earlier gaming days, it WAS about graphics and expansion. Now, it’s far less about graphics, still on expansion and more about innovation.

By: used cisco

used cisco — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 14:35:07 +0000

For me graphics have little do with next gen. When I play a game, I like it to actually FEEL more advanced. Looking better is nice, but thats not whats important to me. To each his own.

By: Xboxlenny

Xboxlenny — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 14:14:46 +0000

I can agree Halo 3 having better graphics was the same game as Halo 2. i guess if its not broke dont fix it. But its not a nex-gen game i was expecting. It makes me feel like its Halo 2.5

I have never played Bio-shock, i dont play single player games often. never played Lair, but looks crappy. I dono if we will ever see a true nex-gen game, they all are just fancy paint jobs and tweaks.

By: Motorbreath

Motorbreath — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 12:04:28 +0000

HAHA!…
Yeah oh ok I guess your game “LAIR” is next gen! stupid angry little developer cant make a decent game so you demonise every other AAA game on the market.

I dont think this guy even know’s that “generations” are pretty much non-existant in gaming, especaily when it comes to PC games every new tittle gets better and better there are almost no games that come out with completely new inovative idea’s or gameplay never seen before.

This is the generation of “Graphics” meaning that most of the “revolutionary” will be all tendered towards its beauty and physics engines that do bring games to life, but if your expecting “new” never before seen gameplay inovations your really going to be disapointed you will see improvements of previouse inovation but I guarentee nothing brand spanking new.

By: Norbit

Norbit — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 11:21:06 +0000

“When a game comes along that truly turns what we think of gaming today on its ear, THAT will be ‘next-gen”.”

The only game I can think of on the horizon that that offers that is LittleBigPlanet.

By: Heru-Ur

Heru-Ur — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 10:45:08 +0000

To each theyre own. To me a “Gen” is alot bigger than what most people think. To me its more like the jump from Pong to Galaga, from Super Mario Bros. to Super Mario 64. Honestly to me there hasent been another major “next-gen” jump in overall gameplay, gfx, sound, controls, etc. Halo to Halo 3 a gen jump? Please. There hasent been a truly groundbreaking game in all categories come out in almost a decade. When a game comes along that truly turns what we think of gaming today on its ear, THAT will be ‘next-gen”.

By: Norbit

Norbit — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 10:30:58 +0000

Personally my minimum requirement for a game being next gen is that it has considerably better graphics than the last gen and as such both of those games fit the bill (and almost all Wii games dont). If games designers want to go the extra mile and try new ideas and innovations in their games then that’s great, but I dont see that as a next gen requirement.

By: NUSNA Mobius1aic

NUSNA Mobius1aic — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 07:28:16 +0000

I must agree that Halo 3 isn’t next gen at all except when considering a few graphical tweaks. Bioshock is IMHO close to achieving the idea of next generation FPS games, with an emphasis on depth rather than shooting itself. However it’s also a double edge sword I think, as many shooters in the purest of sense are also the most fun and engaging. Take for instance FEAR, Far Cry, and Rainbow Six: Vegas. They are very exceeding on the core gameplay that makes them good, and it carries them. Then you have games like Half-Life 2 plus the HL2 Episodes that continue to inspire and awe gamers despite being powered by some 3 year old technology. Now pure shooters don’t always make the best, but executing the game correctly within the lines of gameplay needed to create a fun and engaging experience are what make some games stand out from others. Halo 3 doesn’t do this. Bioshock does. However, I didn’t find Bioshock to be as fun as I hoped. I guess I’m a shooter purest, and I don’t like my shooters gunked up with too much overhead just to play the game.

By: Bulldog

Bulldog — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 05:50:41 +0000

I guess he means not Next-Gen in terms of interacting with the game on a new level, I see the Wii as next-gen (or current gen now, if you like) in that it introduced a new and innovative way to interact with the game environment. Halo and Bioshock regardless of whether you liked or loathed either (and I loooved Bioshock) haven’t introduced any new level of interactivity through either the tangible (Wiimote) or intangible, like altering the story line or environment in a way that is not scripted or pre-planned in some way.

I guess he is just taking a different angle on next-gen, there is no doubt that graphics will always be on the improve, but is that next-gen? Innovation in the way we perceive what is possible in games has come about from the least powerful of the next-gen machines, time for the big boys to put something new and exciting on the table that takes things a little further than the graphical enhancements we expect to see repeated ad-nauseum.

By: used cisco

used cisco — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 04:41:09 +0000

I’m not sure what he means by “next gen”. Certainly Halo 3 was not very next gen, seeing as its nearly identical to the last gen installments. Even the graphics didn’t make the full jump to HD. But Bioshock, thats an interesting claim. I thought it was pretty special in that it wasn’t just a few gameplay tweaks away from other FPSs. At the very least, the style and feel of the game were pretty unique, two features I put some value in.