Head of franchise development at Alan Wake house confirms studio at work on future-generation project, says technology is significantly more capable than current gen.
New consoles from Microsoft and Sony have yet to be announced, but that has not kept Remedy Entertainment's head of franchise development Oskari Hakkinen from claiming how powerful they might be. Speaking to the German edition of Gamesindustry International (translated by GameSpot), Hakkinen confirmed his studio is working on a next-generation project, and shrugged off the thought that new hardware will not be a significant improvement over existing technology.
"Right now we're working as always with a relatively small team on a next-generation project," Hakkinen said. "You always ask yourself: Can the new consoles really be that much better than the old ones? Be assured: They are. It is a quantum leap forward."
Hakkinen did not say if he was referring to a Microsoft or Sony system, or reveal any other details about the game it has in development for unannounced technology. In May, Remedy job listings indicated that the Espoo, Finland-based studio was staffing up for a next-generation game.
In April, Remedy CEO Matias Myllyrinne said the studio is not finished with the Alan Wake franchise. He said plans are "in motion" for a new game in the franchise and teased that a future project from the studio would be released digitally.
If you own a good pic rig now, you know almost exactly what to expect with MS/Sony's next consoles. Personally, i own a pc with a quad core cpu and a gtx 670 (with 9gb system and 4gbg vram), and trust me, while 60fps in 1080 maxed everything is sweet, going from a current gen console game to the pc version, is not as nmuch next gen, as going from a xbo1 to xbox360 game in 2005.
However, one thing is really key here, in that almost every pc game is a port over from the consoles, and very very few pc games are in development for pc only, so it's hard to really tell, what is possible, it coded only on a top end pc/next gen console.
Maybe if MS adds a 8 core cpu, we will see more physics or such using the extran cpu cores, but for me, i'm only expecting a small..but nice jump up from low settings in 720p/30fps to max settings in 1080p/60fps.
Iv'e been gaming since pong, so i have seen all new consoles..just my 2 cents about this.
@PhilipO45 But... the guy in this article is actually, you know, making a video game for the next gen consoles, and it is not the minor update you are mentioning. Think of all the current restrictions, it isn't just 720p/30fps to 1080p/60fps, on a PC that is the only thing you break it down into, but in the console market with 70" TVs things like co-op, 4-player multiplayer split-screen, those things matter, and gamers want them. The current generation is hampered by these things, Halo Reach had to dumb down its graphics in split screen because it couldn't pump the same beauty out. So, beside the awesome lighting and particle effects one gets on a modern PC, the true beauty will be the re-creation of things that a lot of us miss from previous generation standards.
P.S. The original screenshots for Halo 3 multiplayer hardly looked impressive compared to Halo 2
IMO a simple improvement in textures, FPS and lighting gimmicks isn't enough to justify the "next gen" tag. My top features would be a AI dedicated processor, to stop having to deal with the old "arrow to the knee" type stuff, proper rendering of fabric, a material not easy to dodge for many games genres, and maybe a pair of stereoscopic goggles rather than this bizarre touch screen on the controller. I think the new consoles are pushed because there is no alternative, given the piracy situation with the PC, but "next gen" is not anywhere near yet.
Well, when the next gen comes out, I hope they're more backwards compatible than this generation was, and I also hope that the consoles that succeed them are much more backwards compatible. I'm sick and tired of trying to find room to store my old consoles, and it feels wasteful to throw them away.
It's also hellishly inconvenient to have to swap in and out old and new consoles depending on what game I want to play. There's only so much space in your living room/entertainment center. I wish consoles had the PC's level of backwards compatibility.
Its definitely time for some new hardware, the spec were good when they came out but now there just sad. I have all the system and a gaming pc I like both but most of the pc ports suck and come out a months after the consoles and many of the good games never come out on pc's MMO's are the only exception, plus driver and other pc problems suck, Rage worst PC launch ever( got an i7, 16gigs of ram and 2 560ti's and a ssd) so I want more power on my console. It would help out the games in every way possible not just graphics and from what ive read the WiiU is only slightly faster than the ps3 and 360, so when the new consoles come out it will be like the Wii is now collecting dust.
I think we have NO IDEA what we're in store for! More graphics and CPU power doesn't just mean better graphics, it means better physics, better AI, smoother frame rates, crisper detail, more bad guys, bigger and better bad guys, bigger battles, better motion sensing, bigger and better multi-player, basically a more epic experience all-round! Computing power grows exponentially every year, and the current gen consoles are OLD! The next gen will blow us away!
uh graphics are fine and all but it shudnt be an excuse for lazy developers not to make games untill next gen ...square enix..... theres pc 4 that but they should instead focus on innovation i still like playing the good ol mk2 or crash bandicoot and mgs theyre still better than lotsz of the crap out today
@Uiltetwr But, in Square Enix's defense, I believe they made a statement themselves where they said they are hampered by the current generation's limitations, that they couldn't make a modern FF VII on current gen systems because the scope is too large and the current systems can't handle it graphically.
My first game system was the Atari 2600 and I have been gaming ever since. Every system that came out over the years always excited me until now. I remember seeing the new systems in magazines and seeing the games and I couldnt wait. What is there to look forward to now? Better graphics? Other than the graphics there is no game on current generation systems that couldnt be made for the previous generation. Its going to come to a point where systems are so powerfull graphics can be whatever you want. Then why buy a new console?
@externalpower Yeah I'm kind of the same, but do you think the lack of interest will last?
I got revved up for the PS3 the more I learned about it. I think the PS3 was exciting because it had blu-ray, high def, and technically the CPUs' were far superior to the PS2. Oh, and wireless controllers. Oh, and FPS titles and multiplayer - both of which were lacking on the PS2.
I didn't enjoy my PS2 much but the PS3 is hitting the mark consistently, although I am now getting bored with a lot of the graphics.
Having seen the Star Wars 1313 trailer I think the background stuff looks amazing, like an elaborate movie, but the rest of it seemed pretty standard fare - the 3rd person characters and so forth. So I can see myself being non-plussed with the PS4, but then history shows that i'll get excited once details are released.
Another issue though is that things are getting more and more complicated. Mobile phones are becoming better and better gaming machines, same with tablets, cloud gaming is developing etc etc. With the PS3 the only competition was the 360, but I can imagine that the market might be quite diverse by the time the PS4 is released. Maybe it won't be worth it because our mobiles will be just as good.
I'm fine with a long console life cycle. I still used my ps2 significantly after getting my 360 (I never bothered with PS3). It was still relevant when it was 10 years old, even with the Wii, 360 and ps3 out for a couple of years at that time. Gameplay will always trump graphics. A more powerful CPU can be used to enhance gameplay as well as graphics though. New consoles are also too expensive, and I wont get my 720 until probably 2 years after it comes out. I am actually much more likely to get a WiiU after a shorter elapse of time (1 year) depending on 3rd party development and price, mostly because I am intrigued by the gameplay innovations with the tablet controller. As a Wii owner though, I am a little worried the novelty will run thin first with game makers, then with us gamers (exactly what happened to the best selling wii. mine gathers dust).
@SolanOcard Good points, although personally nowadays, when I see all the nice exclusives the Wii gets (particularly in the RPG genre) I'm tempted to get one just for them even though its successor is coming out soon.
Oh probably. It wouldn't take much at this point, especially if they launch it at $250 or $300. xbox360 has been at $200/300 for 3 years. Heck, just upping the RAM to 1-2GB vs the 512MB in 360 would help. And wouldn't be hard to get a better GPU. But it won't be much better, especially in practice. What will happen is that people will code for 360/PS3 and just port to Wii-U and won't up the graphics/physics any for any real improvements. Most likely they will be on-par for the most part. Unless they are designed from the ground-up with Wii-U in mind which is unlikely. Then after xbox3/PS4 come out, they will be the lead and Wii-U will be worse. However the difference won't likely be as huge as this gen since the Wii wasn't even HD. At least all will be HD and differences will be 720 vs 1080, framerate, shading, etc.
Making next-gen systems that are a "quantum leap" better than our six- or seven-year-old current gen systems shouldn't be hard. The CPUs and GPUs in even a mid-range gaming PC or laptop makes mincemeat out of the hardware in the XBOX 360, PlayStation 3, or Wii. The only question is which components will work for them from an engineering and production / cost perspective...other than that, finding superior technology is easy.
@thechuck11 There is a good chance of APU (accelereated processing unit) technology being introduced (GPU + CPU on single chip). It would be used for the same reason as laptops - power saver.
APU's can run DX10-level games well on their own and at low power. Add in a crossfire-connected dedicated GPU and you have 2x or more graphical processing power.
Of course, there's always the chance that the new consoles will continue to only use dedicated GPU's and will focus on including the highest-level GPU's on the market (e.g. GeForce GTX 690) coupled with powerful 4-8 core CPUs.
Amount of RAM will certainly increase. I'll guess a minimum of 4GB, but since current-gen runs on 512MB, it could go up to as little as 1GB.
@rarson@thechuck11 Well, actually, the next Xbox is rumored to have an Nvidia GPU based on leaked specs from an Xbox 720 Alpha kit. Plus, the above specs were only a rumor, whereas the new specs for the next Xbox are a little more grounded.Xbox 720:8-Core CPU8GB RAMNvidia GPUThose were specs from the Alpha kit, though Development Kits are always more powerful then the actual hardware and change radically up until launch. The Nvidia GPU makes sense considering the leaked 56-page document stated that about a couple of years into the Xbox 720's life they were going to introduce cloud gaming, so using Nvidia's Grid technology would make a lot of sense.
I am anticipating the release of these next gen consoles, especially the next Xbox, seeing how the 360 is my current favorite console, and Microsoft will more than likely be the first to release a next gen console. The WiiU is coming first but it is supposedly equipped with ps3/360 similar specs, although slightly better. Hopefully they'll release in 2013. I'm ready for the next wave of consoles.
(o_o) Uh, is this a trick statement? I just learned that a true quantum leap isn't really all that impressive, more akin to a skip than a leap. It's a physics term and it means a small nothing impressive. If you're going to use a word, please use it correctly.
According to a website about physics and why the term being used sound completely retarded. Jim Loy wrote this and it's what I'll use to state my case. "Some people think that a quantum leap is a particularly large leap. This is incorrect. In fact, in quantum physics, where the expression came from, a quantum leap is usually a very tiny leap indeed, often smaller than the diameter of the nucleus of an atom."
@Cait@farcorners Also, since you said you were into writing, I thought I would point out that your sentence construction "It's like if half of us used the word "SMALL", but the other half really meant "HUGE" and the other half used it properly." implies that people who use the "HUGE" definition use it properly. Which is true in that a quantum change is a complete transformation from one state to another. Which is a pretty huge change. Like a caterpillar into a butterfly.
@Cait@farcorners Quantum means a complete change of state. From zero to one is huge, undeniably, just as 30 is to 90,000,000. Both are quantum leaps. An quantum state change can be both small or large, even at the same time. I would love a quantum leap in my salary... and that certainly doesn't mean an extra $5 a day, let alone 5cents (which would seem to be your definition).
I did some "RESEARCH", I'm NOT an expert and it's something "I" found online. Everyone else has access to this same informtion, so why use terms one way, but it means something else entirely and against the real definition. I am into writing, you use the proper term, according to the definition. This ensures that we are all on the same page. I followed proper scientific ideas, I quoted someone and I told you exactly who it is I'm quoting. I'm sorry you don't like what I said, that's what it really is. No where does it claim I am an expert, but I am sick to death of people misusing terms.
According to OXFORD, the proper definition is #1, which states: 1 Physics an abrupt transition of an electron, atom, or molecule from one quantum state to another, with the absorption or emission of a quantum. While #2 is not the real definition and shouldn't be used as such. A true quantium leap is something small, barely noticeable. The gentleman's quote does show that he's aware that people are misusing this term and what it really means.
It's like if half of us used the word "SMALL", but the other half really meant "HUGE" and the other half used it properly. We won't know what we're talking about, hence confusion and fights. I do know some things about science, but I am not an expert. Me, I'm willing to change my use of words when I learn I'm wrong. Again, proper use of words,
@Cait@farcorners "According to a website..." (lol) and quoting it does not an expert make. Should we trust your intelligence by your use of the word "retarded"? When seeking to define a word, it is most helpful to check a few dictionaries first. Something you obviously didn't do.
This generation was not a 'quantum leap' over the last (assuming you owned an original Xbox). If you owned a PS2 or a Gamecube, then yes, but the original Xbox was quite amazing in it`s day and had some really technologically advanced mechanics over it`s competitors.
A glaring comparison was Ubisoft`s Rainbow Six series (well, Athena Sword & Black Arrow). They were completely different games with the Xbox version taking full advantage of MSs hardware and the PS2 & GC versions not being able to produce the same game...in every facet. Youtube it - you`ll see what I mean.
1. By definition of the word, a generation is determined by the period of time in which a person (or in this case, a console) lives, which means that the Wii U couldn't possibly be current-gen.
2. Wii U is significantly more powerful than the current hardware, so even if you're determining generations by randomly-defined criteria such as processing power, it still wouldn't be current-gen.
3. The next Xbox and Playstation hardware is already pretty heavily rumored to be not much more powerful (if at all) than what Nintendo is using in the Wii U, which is the entire reason I made the comment.
What about them? Do you think that they'll "need" 8GB of RAM to run on a console? I highly doubt that 8GB will be the requirement even on the PC when these engines actually arrive. Everyone went gaga when Epic showed the Samaritan demo on the 680, claiming it was as powerful as three 580s, but the fact of the matter is that it just wasn't optimized at all when they were demoing it on the 580s.
@rarson@Vodoo To rarson: Okay but what about the Luminous Engine, Unreal Engine 4, the Fox Engine, and Unity Engine 4? These are BIG game engines that was made for the next-gen hardware. They *need* at leeast 8GB of RAM to run on the PC.
That's simply not true. Generations are divided by time, sorry.
"Second, where do you get this info that Nintendos' console is supposedly on par with Sony & Microsofts?"
Nintendo's rumored to be using either a 4850 or a 4770 GPU. Microsoft is rumored to be using a 6670. The 4770 is more powerful than the 6670, so if those rumors are true, then the Wii U could actually be more powerful than the next Xbox. Sony is rumored to be using a 7670 (which is exactly the same as the 6670) but also an AMD APU rather than a CPU, meaning that it'll probably have a bit more graphical power than the next Xbox, probably more than the Wii U.
Applying a basic understanding of economics, considering the current state of the global economy, and recognizing the total disaster that was losing tons of money on hardware for years when they could have been making money, it's not hard to figure out that Sony and Microsoft can't afford to take the same strategy this time around.
We also know that IBM has silicon baking in the fabs right now... actually, it's probably done. Those chips are for Microsoft's hardware dev kits. The hardware is pretty much finalized, which seems to agree with the timing of some of the hardware rumors.
"Everything I've read states otherwise, that the Wii U is basically a beefed up 360, and that's from multiple sources friend."
Go read what reputable sources are saying. Even developers have already said that the Wii U is significantly more powerful than the PS3 and 360. If you still have a hard time believing this, then watch the side-by-side comparison of Assassin's Creed 3 on PS3 and Wii U. The Wii U is clearly running at 1080p and according to Ubisoft, at 60 FPS. We have actual game footage that shows us the Wii U is significantly more powerful than the PS3. It's also 6 years newer, so that actually *makes sense* if you know anything about hardware. What you are saying does not make sense.
"Most articles say that the next Xbox is 5 times as powerful as this gens Xbox."
That's probably a bit of an overestimate. I haven't read that from any reputable sources. Here's a clue though: what has Microsoft been pushing since 2010? What is Microsoft likely including with every next Xbox? They can't afford to put Kinect 2 in every box if the hardware is expensive. So again, facts and common sense seem to agree with the previously mentioned hardware rumor.
"The Wii U is MAYBE half the power of the Xbox 720/PS4. And I don't need specs to know that, I can tell just by looking at the Wii U games."
And presumably that also includes using a time machine to see the 720 and PS4 games to which you are comparing them.
"Stop trying to think Nintendo is gonna compete with MS and Sony, they're not."
I'm just applying logic and common sense to the facts that we already know to determine which rumors are likely true.
"Nintendo doesn't care about gamers anymore"
Right, which is why they're the only company focusing on improving the actual gaming experience.
Look, I've been playing video games since the days of Pong machines. I've followed the industry closely since I was a kid. I've seen, played, and owned dozens of different consoles, including some that most people haven't even heard of. I don't need some idiot kid on the internet repeating forum hearsay trying to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about.
@rarson@Mr_Bodywave You are so off base. The "next-gen" terminology was originally for the machines' capabilities, not the point in time it releases.
Second, where do you get this info that Nintendos' console is supposedly on par with Sony & Microsofts? Everything I've read states otherwise, that the Wii U is basically a beefed up 360, and that's from multiple sources friend. I've NEVER seen anything that says it's close to what the real next-gen systems are capable of. The Wii U is part of the current generation, imo, not the next generation.
Most articles say that the next Xbox is 5 times as powerful as this gens Xbox. So for your sake, remove your head from your ass and come back to reality. The Wii U is MAYBE half the power of the Xbox 720/PS4. And I don't need specs to know that, I can tell just by looking at the Wii U games.
Stop trying to think Nintendo is gonna compete with MS and Sony, they're not. They're going after the casual market. The only reason they make any Zelda games anymore is because they know there's still the blind, ignorant Nintendo faithful that will take all the abuse and still keep coming back for more. So they throw you a bone with Zelda. They're a disgrace of their former selves. Nintendo doesn't care about gamers anymore, so MOVE ON!!! They want your grand parents and 8 year-old sister. And as soon as you sheep would open your eyes and realize that, the better off you'll be.
@mario-nin-freak @rarson t be fair to both of you, it's because this article is about the PS and 360 successors, where as the Wii U is more in line with the current consoles and we already know about it.