Excited as I was to finally see a next-generation console, much of the PlayStation 4 software we saw last week struck me as underwhelming. It was pretty, certainly, and I'm all for beautiful games; I paid a great deal to upgrade my PC in 2011 so that Battlefield 3 would look its finest, and it irks me that Far Cry 3 and Crysis 3 each stresses my computer to the point that I can't see every last bit of visual goodness they have to offer and maintain a decent framerate. Still, gorgeous graphics are not all I want out of new games, and yet it would seem as if the PS4's hardware is being extolled purely for its ability to accommodate even nicer-looking visuals.
That belief is representative of the majority of what Sony had on show last week. While the capabilities of the hardware to push more pixels was invariably going to be a major part of the event, with the way things went you could be left thinking the future of games entails little more than better-looking games that boot up faster than ever. That's all well and good -- I am legitimately excited for auto-downloads, suspend modes, and all manners of hurdles between player and game being removed -- but the hurdles Sony and Microsoft should be doing their damndest to remove lay between independent developers and next-generation consoles.
It would be unfair to pass judgment on all next-gen games based on the relatively brief look we were afforded, but the PS4 unveiling remains the only peek we've gotten at what's to be be expected from software designed for the next wave of consoles. And, as limited a look as it was, you could get a sense of what certain games were shooting for. My initial reaction was that these games looked nice but didn't appear to be doing anything new; one week later, I feel even more strongly about that. At the time, I suggested the games lacked a "next-gen feel," something that some commenters took issue with. These games look nicer than what we've got now, so what do you mean they don't have a 'next gen feel'?
Even if we accept that none of it could look as nice if it were released on current-gen hardware -- forgetting about the games with stand-out visuals like Halo 4 and Ni No Kuni that are on Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 -- the games shown weren't doing anything that would have been out of place on 360 or PS3. Take Killzone: Shadow Fall, for instance, which was one of the first PS4 games shown. Even as I was watching the demo, there was an undeniable sense that this was, from a gameplay perspective, a standard first-person shooter. When the system's first racing game, Driveclub, was shown, the talk centered around the painstaking efforts to recreate real-world cars (sounds like the last time a Forza or Gran Turismo was announced, doesn't it?) and social features that wouldn't be unrealistic on PS3 or 360. Watch Dogs looks like good fun, but it's not a next-gen exclusive, nor is Diablo III or Destiny. Capcom's Deep Down, assuming it was something more than a tech demo, was another game whose presentation was about the visuals and nothing more.
When it was Quantic Dream boss David Cage's turn to talk about what the PS4 will make possible, he didn't proceed to talk about improvements in artificial intelligence, more engrossing game worlds, or anything else of the sort. Instead, he was there to talk about polygons, and how the PS4 will be capable of handling so many, you guys. Numbers that are ultimately meaningless to gamers were shared, and a real-time 3D model of an old man's head was shown to better demonstrate the possibilities. Look, it was a fine head. But the suggestion that developers will now be limited only by their imaginations and that the PS4 has enough horsepower to really evoke emotions strikes me as silly for two reasons. The first is that, as with every piece of hardware developers have used before, eventually it will be pushed to its limits and restrict what can be done -- the constraints might be out of the way, but that's only true until developers think up new ways to be constrained.
The second is the fact that emotional game experiences are already in our hands, and they don't require cutting-edge technology. Fire Emblem Awakening has been cited numerous times as a great recent example of this: It's a game that runs on the relatively underpowered 3DS and, due to what I presume is some sort of clipping problem, has an issue where characters' feet sink beneath the surface of the ground during cinematics and can almost never be seen. Despite this and a lack of 30,000-polygon character models, it accomplishes a great deal and is capable of evoking emotions; the same is also true of games like Journey, Flower, and Mass Effect 3 (despite all the flak it gets).
Better graphics don't always equate to better or more emotional games, and I hope developers are cognizant of that and don't lose sight of what matters most as they explore what can be done with next-gen hardware.
Refreshingly, it was at this very same Sony event that we heard something that does make me hopeful for the future. Braid designer Jonathan Blow didn't come out and talk about how many more polygons PS4 will allow him to use. He was there talking up The Witness, a game he describes as having a dense, open world that respects your time by not wasting it with filler content intended to prolong your playtime. The Witness is not exclusively coming to next-generation consoles, but it is the PS4 game I was most intrigued by because it features the kind of forward thinking I'd like to see more of -- the sort of thing we tend to see more often from independent developers, which have traditionally had a difficult time calling consoles home. Many independent games never make it to consoles. Among those that do, you've got games that are the beneficiaries of exceptions being made (a group that consists solely of Minecraft, which is only allowed to break XBLA rules because of its already-established popularity on PCs) and some that suffer from the burdens placed on them (look at Fez and how Polytron couldn't afford to patch it).
The Witness excites me because, despite the parallels drawn to Myst, it feels like something new and different. It's just the sort of game PS4 (along with Wii U and the next Xbox) need more of, only they're unlikely to get many of them without making a concerted effort. At its event last week, Sony talked about making PS4 a more open platform that would be welcoming to independent developers, except we still haven't heard any specifics as to what it plans to do differently. Aside from grabbing a timed exclusive for The Witness (PS4 will be the only console it's available on at launch), it did nothing to prove it has a commitment to indies.
In fact, there is reason to believe independent developers still won't have the tools they do on other, non-console platforms. After talking up PlayStation Mobile, which doesn't require developers to have access to a dev kit, SCE Worldwide Studios head Shuhei Yoshida told Gamasutra that, despite attempts to make dev kits cheaper, they still might not be cheap enough. "We usually don't talk about the pricing of the dev kit. But yeah, I'd say it can be cheaper," he said. "But I don't know if it's cheap enough for those indie guys. Because it's not just the cost of hardware, it's also the SDKs and tool chains and dev support and all those costs."
Even if Sony ditches the long certification processes (and accompanying fees) that currently stand as an impediment for developers (and games that need to be frequently updated), the cost involved with obtaining dev kits will remain a barrier to entry that many small developers can't overcome. While we aren't privy to Sony or Microsoft's precise plans for how they will handle indies on their new systems, this, along with the discontinuation of the XNA platform, don't suggest we'll be seeing next-gen consoles that can compare with PC and mobile in terms of openness or indie friendliness.
Failing to level that particular playing field would be a big missed opportunity. I think there is a tendency to think of free Flash games when the term "indie gaming" is used. While there are many worthwhile indie games that fit in that category, there is a lot more to indie games than just those and the occasional game like Braid or Super Meat Boy that hits it big. (Minecraft is again in a class of its own, having sold 20-plus million units.) Just look at Kickstarter and the sheer amount of money gamers are handing over to developers who are promising to deliver the games people want but publishers are unwilling to fund. Millions have been shelled out for games with no place on current-gen consoles, and the start of the next generation is an opportunity for arms to be opened to these creators and their games. The platform holders need to position themselves to be more like Steam or the App Store, where the development process is streamlined and the front door is less likely to keep developers out -- basically, the opposite of what happens now, where the limited number of XBLA slots that exist have to be rented from publishers.
Having hardware capable of handling nicer-looking games is good news, provided that extra horsepower serves some real purpose. Offering the same experiences with nicer visuals is not the kind of justification I think many people need to drop hundreds and hundreds of dollars on new hardware. I don't mean to suggest that opening the flood gates to independent developers of all sorts is some sort of panacea. However, it would do everyone -- gamers, developers, and console manufacturers -- some good for more games made by smaller teams and individuals to get exposure by being made available on consoles. These games stand a chance of pushing the industry at large in a direction it oftentimes appears hesitant to go in, one where innovation and change are valued more highly. If that happens, the platform holders will realize their stringent ways were only getting in the way of making more money, and even those writing off the prospects of new consoles might have to give them a second look.
No comments:
Post a Comment