Jaffe couldn't care less about next-gen consoles, likes t...

[robometal cowboy]

Jaffe couldn't care less about next-gen consoles, likes the 3DS
Click Here to View Story

"I couldn't care less about next-gen. I started at Sony Imagesoft doing Super Nintendo and Sega Genesis games, and I went through that to PS1, then PS2, PS3, Vita... You go through the cycle enough and you realise today's 'Oh my f@#$ing God' is tomorrow's 'Ehh, whatever'.

Ultimately, this is all going to be yesterday's news and it's about the experience, the game. Unless we're talking about holodecks, or AI that's so amazing it can actually write a compelling story around you procedurally based on your choices, I'm not interested." - David Jaffe

While Jaffe may not be excited for the next-gen console race, he clearly has some love for the 3DS.

"I'm no longer that excited about next-gen technology; it means budgets go up. It sucks. The biggest thing I want is what you get from the PSP and the 3DS - it's always on, there's a sleep mode and I can just hit a button and I'm right back where I was and I don't have to go through all the boot-up s#@t."

Link

[LegendofSantiago]

I love the sleep mode on the 3DS. It makes it feel more portable for some reason

[Laharl-KOTNW]

I'm with Jaffe; It take more than just better graphics to impress me. Gameplay>graphics.

[Zug Zug]

I agree with jaffe

[CaptainColon]

I kinda agree with him. Even though I want and will buy the next batch of consoles, I'm not very excited for any of them (well, especially since two of them haven't even been officially announced yet). I just realize that it is time for something new.

[internet]

he's quite aggressive , but to be honest without the ds and the wii i would have stopped and limit myself to the big mario and zelda . Of course expecting a massive jump is stupid , but if they would put more thought into the wii pointer , the wii thrust and wii motion + maybe they would have something more .
Technically both the 3ds and wii u could bring a 360 world , obviously that's not going to be used as always but that's something

[kdognumba1]

While Jaffe can be an aggressive deuch, I have to completely agree with him on this.

[WesFX]

Yeah, I completely agree with this.

I'm probably wrong, but I feel like this is the first time I've heard such comments from Jaffe.

[Jerome]

Graphics technology has advanced so much that we're getting to the point of diminishing returns. Sure, they can get better, but it will take a lot more power, development cost, and retail cost to achieve big advancements in the near term, and more and more people are questioning if that's really worth it. I personally think the current generation would have benefited from starting a year later than it did.

Think about this, the PS2 is still on the market 12 years (!?) after it launched. The 360 and PS3 could conceivably be on the market for 15 years at this rate, filling a lower-tier market postion than Microsoft and Sony's next systems, and it would be a good thing for everybody.

[darkvaati]

I'm with Jaffe; It take more than just better graphics to impress me. Gameplay>graphics.

becuase, obviously, computing power dosen't permit new gameplay ideas

[MrGameBoy]

If only more game designers could be like Jaffe in regards to "next-generation" gaming...

@Jerome
THIS.

@darkvaati
Sure, more power can allow for new ideas, but can you name me any that made unique use of it this generation? Because I'm struggling to come up with one. I'm gonna blame developers for focusing too much on visual fidelity. What's wrong with working within limitations? And too add further to Jerome's mention of "diminishing returns", I feel that the costs outweigh the benefits: why pay more for games for slightly prettier graphics?

[Jerome]

Sure, more power can allow for new ideas, but can you name me any that made unique use of it this generation? Because I'm struggling to come up with one.

I'd have to think about it for a while, but I'm sure the list would be a lot shorter than last generation. Games like Pikmin, Katamari Damacy, Spider-Man 2, and many others just wouldn't have been possible in a similar state on the N64/PS1, because those systems couldn't display enough objects on screen, or environments that large with any level of detail. The advancements this generation basically allowed for greater visual fidelity, which is nice, but hasn't produced much that wasn't fundamentally possible on PS2-generation hardware. For instance, the Modern Warfare ports to Wii were pretty much the same games as their HD counterparts, just with lower graphical quality. The technical advancements this generation that had the greatest influence on game design were new control inputs, online functionality, and integrated mass storage, all of which could have worked with previous generation hardware, and were in fact tried last gen, though in a much more limited capacity.

I'm gonna blame developers for focusing too much on visual fidelity.

I'm sure that's some of it. We know many developers always want the latest cutting-edge hardware to "realize their artistic vision", but for many years the primary gaming market was comprised largely of people who always demanded the best graphics possible, regardless of cost or other considerations. These days, with more and more new gamers who don't need the latest ultra-realistic tech to be satisfied, and more of the traditional market becoming more satisfied with what's already available, the demands of the market are changing. If the industry doesn't recognize that change and begin to adapt, they'll be in a bad position, with greatly increasing costs involved in appealing to a market that isn't really growing, and may in fact be shrinking.

What's wrong with working within limitations?

I'd actually argue that it can be a good thing, as it can work to discourage bloat and inefficiency, and keep game design focused. Personally, I'm more impressed with excellent design optimization than raw technical specs.

[darkvaati]

@darkvaati
Sure, more power can allow for new ideas, but can you name me any that made unique use of it this generation? Because I'm struggling to come up with one. I'm gonna blame developers for focusing too much on visual fidelity. What's wrong with working within limitations? And too add further to Jerome's mention of "diminishing returns", I feel that the costs outweigh the benefits: why pay more for games for slightly prettier graphics?[/quote]
Well this generation was not particulary good regarding innovation, mostly because war games beign the focus and Wii beign the platform for the developers who usually put some creativity in their works, nullifing the power increment. But even if it was more subtle we've seen bigger worlds, realistic and fun to play with physics, intelligent and useful AI (just look at RE5 lol) and an immense on screen number of zombies (or sangoku soldiers in the cose of DW) to hack and slash to your heart content. I'm a sucker for retro aestethics and gameplay concepts but limitations must be the choice of the developer and not a costriction.