Are todays games good enough for people to play in say 20 years without them feeling outdated/clunky?
Not really. 20 years is a long fucking time for games.
>>319836254
Commercial gaming almost exists for 20 years and look where it took us. Do you think pic related is outdated/clunky? I sure think so. For others it's to this day the second coming of christ.
If that's the case with Witcher 3 then I must have jumped 20 years into the future.
>>319837158
How come the HUD take up most of the space in old PC games?
Hardware limitations?
>>319836254
Good ones? Yes. We've long passed the basic threshold of graphics. Like a lot of tech there's an S-curve involved, where it starts slow (think about the decade following Pong's 1972 release) then rapid accelerates, going exponential briefly, then slows down and starts to hit diminishing returns. Arguably we passed a lot of core thresholds as far back as the late 90s/early 00s. Think about something like the PS1 vs the PS2: the PS1 didn't merely have worse textures or models or less power or whatever, it lacked fundamental core modern features like a Z-buffer entirely. That's why it's vastly harder to enhance PS1 games in emulation then something that had equivalent power but also core features would be.
Now though there's lots of stuff that won't change much in looks over time. A 1080p sprite game with a really good art style and gameplay will be every bit as fun as it ever was a decade or two later, graphics already ceased to be the point. Even for games that do heavily use graphics, the difference 1995->2015 is going to vastly, enormously higher then 2015->2035 would be. Yes there will be more detail, full VR and so on. But normal humans will not have to go to that much trouble to enjoy them, our eyeballs aren't changing.
It's mostly likely that a lot of future power, just like in regular computing, will go less to making vidya look/act better and more towards making it CHEAPER to make through ever more automation of certain development tasks. Procgen for instance is still incredibly primitive in general.
What people don't realize is, that since the first xbox/sony-era, games in terms of technology and ingenuity, have stagnated hugely.
You may think about consoles what you like and that is out of the question, but microsoft and sony like to produce cheap as fuck and would pay anyone to develop as restricted as possible for their weak machines, just to keep the game in a fluid/playable state.
I think gaming in 20 years will literally bring us nowhere. We don't make these huge jumps anymore, because of console-gaming.
>>319836254
Yes and no I think
Some types of games have a gameplay and interfaces that modern players just cannot get into. See:
>>319837158
Things like point and click adventure games were popular 20 years ago, but are now relegated to mobile gaming or indie PC development.
Depending on the game, it may hold up very well. There are more than a few dozen people here who have probably replayed games like:
Link to the Past
Chrono Trigger
And even older games:
NES's LoZ 1
SMB
Donkey Kong
The same as any other entertainment medium:
The titles generally accepted to be the best/have the biggest and longest lasting fan base will stick around. The rest, not so much.
>>319838171
>I think gaming in 20 years will literally bring us nowhere.
I think you are literally retarded.
>We don't make these huge jumps anymore, because of console-gaming.
No, we don't because the low hanging fruit has been picked. Cycles are slowing down in general as we start to hit limits of physics in silicon. Optical computing still looks to be quite a ways off, as does memory/mainline storage unification via something like Xpoint. Yeah there's still lots to do but it's not happening every 9 months either.
I think it'd actually be pretty healthy for vidya if as I said above a lot more computing power got spent on making things cheaper rather then pursuing more fidelity. Basic economics, if a game is cheaper to make, then it needs a much smaller audience to be profitable. And if it needs a smaller audience, then it can be more niche and interesting because it doesn't have to be super generic to be the same thing to every person. We'll see lots of shit too of course, the 90%/10% rule will apply in spades, but overall more experimentation and variety is our best shot at returning to older times.
>>319837548
Power had something to do with really old stuff, but in a lot of cases in general think about it anon, it's pretty straight forward: there are basic fundamental limits on how small you can make a HUD. Fonts cannot be shrunk infinitely, and long before you reach the point where nobody can read it you'll reach the point where most of your audience can't read it. Conversely, in a lot of games there's only so big a HUD needs to be before every bit of useful information is conveyed fine.
So with a really low resolution, proportionally a HUD will take up more space vs content. A 1920x1200 screen has 7.5x the pixels of 640x480. That 640x480 screen pretty much already had all the HUD that was needed, and some additional GPU power can go towards making it even more spartan. So what grows is the space for everything else.
>>319838781
No, you are wrong and here's why:
A console is just a bloated Iphone. Overpriced and fails at every front against a decent pc in the same price-range that can depict games in better fluidity and resolution.
But console gaming has more
>advertising money
>huge market value since easier accessibility
Your autism won't change these factors, schlomo. Your console is a bloated piece of shit, overpriced and the reason why we can't have games with decent technology behind it. That's why we get Call of Doody every year, instead of games that actually bring graphical/gameplay fidelity/innovation forward.
That's why indie-gaming has increased as a huge niche that is already contesting "the big guys", despite it being smaller, retro-inspired games, or Unity-created projects.
And STILL indie-games aren't that much favored by Sony and Microsoft, since they have no agency over their development and mostly they don't sell that way anyway.
Xbox and Sony are literally Apple at the moment, who release a barely "better" version of their phone every other year, because people eat it up and don't protest the lack of invention.
Educate yourself.
>>319839684
>console is bloated iphone
ebin
>>319839684
>bloated
Pcs are bloated. Build me a pc for 350 that can play 2015 games. Make sure it uses 150 watts or less while youre at it. Consoles are really efficient
>>319836254
yes, they're so good they'll remaster it for the console right after it came out
>>319840150
>make up some phony rules because you couldn't come up with an argument
No, won't be playing by your rules. Provide sources and facts or fuck off.
>>319839684
It's as if you want every person out there to adopt a PC and stick it next to their television and have them figure out how to wirelessly connect a controller.
What you're saying is essentially like a car enthusiast bitching about how "casual" car drivers aren't tuning up their vehicles.
>>319836254
>People unironically rode Roach through the streets of Novigrad.
>>319840406
>phony rules
The ps4 costs 350 and uses 150 watts of power. Also has a 1.8 tflops gpu and 8gb of unified gddr5. Feel free to google if you dont believe me. I dont think a pc can do better for the price
>>319840783
>assuming
>implying
I don't fucking want anything. I just tell you how it is. Companies want to cheaply make profit. That's okay. That's how the world spins. You act like the uneducated, low-IQ virgin you are and scream "WHAT THEY WANT DEM PROFIT? HOW DARE THEY!"
Consoles are shit because they are being made shit. Nobody wants to spend money on quality, because you like being fed shit to.
>>319840958
You're the one getting worked up over this, i'm just pointing out how pathetic you are that's all.
>>319841197
>getting dismantled into pieces in front of everyone
>"Y-you are p-p-pathetic!"
Whine some more, low-IQ degenerate.
>>319841292
Go on with your holy crusade to persuade the world that PC is better. Keep fighting the good fight and save humanity.
I'll be playing FTL 50 years from now like how my grandma plays solitaire.
Some games yes.
Simple, addicting games are timeless. To this say people still play tetris
Video games will reach a cap where we will start slowing down on original IPs and will eventually just start rebooting/remaking old classics for the modern audience.
It happened to films, it happened to Nintendo, it will happen to the whole industry.
Oddly enough TV shows are one of the only mediums with some originality left. Netlfix and Hulu were a huge boon to both industries.
Maybe the only way to shake things up in the vidya industry is to change our method of consumption for games.
It can go either way honestly.
>>319836254
They aren't even good enough to play today without them feeling outdated and clunky compared to games 10 years ago.
>>319842562
It's been like that for a few years now. Half the games coming out these days are reboots or remakes.
Is Moore's Law dead?
Depends on the game. The witcher games are already clunky by today's standards.
>>319842562
>It happened to films, but not books or television, so it will definitely happen to video games!
>>319836254
Old games feel clunky because they had terrible controls. Games from about 2005 onwards have pretty standardised controls for each genre.
>So many games adopting the Assassin Creed 'PRESS X TO WIN' style of gameplay so that even a drooling ape can complete the game
I'll take my outdated clunky games thank you very much. At least they had actual gameplay
>>319842562
>TV
>original
It's all the same shit with slightly different settings depending on the genre.
>>319836254
I can play games like Thief 3 just fine, and that one in-particular was released more than a decade ago.
The jump in general graphical fidelity and gameplay design from 2000-2004 was pretty huge.
Lately, there's been a decline in the latter and not much interesting going on with the former; it kind of tapered off around 2007.
>>319837548
>>319839290
Power did have a lot to do with it. A smaller 3D view means less rendering work. See: Doom and Wolfenstein allowing you to adjust the size.
>>319845321
Not really.
Uninformed journalists will have you believe that stuffing transistors into increasingly miniaturized form factors isn't as important as it once was because of "parallel processing", but the truth is that all computing, serial and parallel, relies on the mighty transistor to render a useful output.
To massively parallel systems, Moore's law still applies:
More parallel processing? More processors. More transistors. More cramming into tighter places.
It never ends, and the need for more computing power in smaller spaces is insatiable.
>>319837548
Sometimes, yes.
It was also sometimes naive design and, in many cases, a limitation of programming languages like C.
User interfaces were and still are a gigantic pain in the ass to implement with statically compiled languages.
A well-planned UI that shows just what you need, is just the right size and doesn't look garish? You're pushing it.
A fancy, modular UI with lots of cool animated transitions? Out of the question.
The UI would always be scheduled last because of their "get into everything, everywhere" nature of implementation, and dev teams rarely had enough time in the end to polish them beyond what you see.
>>319836254
Considering people still play the fuck out of Doom and it just past 22 years. Yes.
The progress of technology rises in an exponential rate. The second I see a fucking robot walking down the streets, that's the day that I fear technology and become Crazy Old Anon that screams everytime a robot walks near his sidewalk.
>>319840150
I'll advocate this one the initial financial investment is a big barrier, poorfag arguments nonwithstanding. I don't regret buying my rig but if more people could access PC gaming too.
A problem, I feel is that a lot of genres aren't possible on a console. How many potential total war nerds will never get a chance to settle the Gauls? Ideally, to me, that hardware drops in price where the only decision you have to make is whether or not you want to use a controller or keyboard.
Consoles will always have a use for the couch, local multiplayer is important. Those long nights on the PS2 with a friend over is something I hope every generation gets to experience.
20 years is a long time and no game that came out 20 years ago doesn't feel clunky.
