Developers share next-generation wish list

Game developers talk about ideas they want to see implemented in the next generation, ranging from more power to lessons from mobile devices, free-to-play PCs, and easier patches and updates.

55

With all the talk of PlayStation 4s and Xbox 720s and such lately, it seems the next generation is fast approaching. All those technical bells and whistles won't amount to much without developer support, though, so it's important to consider what studios want out of the next gen.

Gamasutra posed the question question to various game developers, from Epic to Ubisoft.

Tim Sweeney, founder of Epic Games, suggests that the next consoles should learn lessons from mobile devices, from Facebook integration to ease of buying and downloading games on the App Store without having to make physical media. "So, having all the things you'd expect from the game industry as a whole, and the best that's been done elsewhere, and bringing that to the console platform is really important." Of course, it wouldn't be Epic without wanting more power, and Sweeney says he'd like to see "as many teraflops as is economically possible" to create new experiences.

Crytek, another performance-heavy developer, similarly suggests having more powerful tools, but also wants to see consoles take note from the differentiated pricing models on PC and mobile devices. "We're seeing a change in models in games toward more freemium content, and a quicker response to your community," said Crytek's Carl Jones. "You can be very successful with a game by giving a game away for free, and then giving players the content they want. And if they really want it, and are really enjoying it, that's when they'll pay for it. That's appropriate. Why shouldn't we do it like that?"

Other responses range from "a much more fluid means of providing updates to consumers" (Capcom's Christian Svensson) to more platform parity and reduced "bureaucracy" for things like game updates (Ubisoft's David Polfeldt).

One would hope that Sony and Microsoft are taking this kind of feedback into consideration, and have already heard it all and made plans for how to implement these ideas. We won't know for sure, of course, until we hear console plans from the manufacturers themselves.

Editor-In-Chief
From The Chatty
  • reply
    April 2, 2012 2:30 PM

    Steve Watts posted a new article, Developers share next-generation wish list.

    Game developers talk about ideas they want to see implemented in the next generation, ranging from more power to lessons from mobile devices, free-to-play PCs, and easier patches and updates.

    • reply
      April 2, 2012 4:08 PM

      add full keyboard & mouse support to all games on the next-gen platform & I am there.

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 4:09 PM

        Or, and I'm just throwing this out there...get a PC.

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 4:10 PM

        Buy a PC, already has that.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 4:50 PM

          The PC's always the dead-last priority on multiplatform games, unless the developer actually puts extra time and devotion into the PC version (most developers don't, or can't).

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 4:50 PM

        The amount of R&D on getting KB+M on to a console is highly prohibitive.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 7:38 PM

          sarcasm detector if having trouble getting a lock on

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 6:07 PM

        No.

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 6:57 PM

        That would level the playing field, i'm all for it.

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 8:39 PM

        This is the only way I would buy a console and I would be happy.

    • reply
      April 2, 2012 4:13 PM

      Wow the list is fucking terrible. I fear for the actual games in the coming generation.

    • reply
      April 2, 2012 4:17 PM

      so what is the SHACK CONSOLE WISHLIST?

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 4:21 PM

        Reliable consoles. Seriously. No disk read errors, no red rings, just stuff that is hardy and LASTS.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 4:26 PM

          This, and I'll add using some kind of fast solid state media for the games so we don't have to deal with slow as hell optical drives and/or long hard drive installs.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 4:57 PM

          you want technological advancement, you'll need to take a hit in stability and longevity. it's just how technology works, it's not even really a money thing.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 5:09 PM

          Gamecube 2012!!

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 5:55 PM

          It's sad that this has be even be on a wishlist.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 6:09 PM

          Within reason. If your hard drive or video card dies in 3 years you don't freak out because there is mechanical shit on there and electronics that can fail. Same goes for consoles. We aren't in the days of cartridges with the exception of the portable market.

          • reply
            April 2, 2012 6:21 PM

            3 years minimum at least. Assuming it's not cheaply built. . . if you have proper heat dissipation, and you are giving it clean power, (ups' are your friend), the hardware should last a long time. However with mechanical I'm a bit more forgiving. Hard drives, fans, etc.

            The 360 was straight up poor design.

            • reply
              April 2, 2012 7:29 PM

              The original design was poor. My current one is over 3 years running now. On the other hand pretty well all my friend's launch PS3's have been replaced at least once for YLOD or drive errors.

          • reply
            April 2, 2012 9:18 PM

            Um, wat? If I bought a video card and it died in three years I'd think long and hard before purchasing anything else that company made. I build my computers to last 6 years and expect the parts to hold out - and generally they have done so without issue.

            • reply
              April 2, 2012 9:25 PM

              You are not the rule I'd say. 6 years for a PC is a long time. Are you saying you do no upgrades in that time? Also, after 3 years I expect hard drives to start dropping. They are mechanical and nothing running at high RPM like that is immune to failure. Same thing goes for fans and other components. We aren't talking military or industrial grade parts here.

              • reply
                April 2, 2012 9:42 PM

                No, I only change parts out if something isn't working right. So far this has only been to address heat issues. I deliberately buy parts that are a gen or so back when building computers because they tend to be significantly more reliable, as they've had time to iron out the issues. While the computers tend to be pretty worn down by year 6, I've never had a part fail on me outside the traditional first 3 months where the manufacturing defects tend to show.

                • reply
                  April 2, 2012 10:07 PM

                  And you know that when consoles are released they are usually trying to pack an obscene amount of shit into a small box right. There is some overlap, but your comparison isn't 100% fair.

                  • reply
                    April 2, 2012 10:10 PM

                    Fair enough, but my PS1 and SNES are still working fine. Hell, my damn original Game Boy brick lasted longer than TWO successive PSPs. it's only once the console arms race started with the PS2/Xbox gen that all these issues started cropping up. Obviously the machines are much more complex than they used to be but that doesn't mean they can't put more of a priority on longevity.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 9:28 PM

          I'd bet money that QA will be a top priority for both MS and Sony after the boondoggles of this generation.

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 4:44 PM

        Ban patches. Or at least make it fucking hard to release a patch through first party. Worst thing to happen to the industry ever. It really promotes shoddy releases.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 4:47 PM

          god no

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 4:47 PM

          [deleted]

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 4:49 PM

          it's funny because this is the opposite of what devs want!

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 4:53 PM

          No fucking way. If you want tighter requirements for release then ask for that. But patches are great.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 4:54 PM

          Oh god no that would be terrible.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 4:59 PM

          [deleted]

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 5:07 PM

          LOL Thanks I've had a long day and that is the funniest thing I've seen.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 5:20 PM

          It would be nice if games were more polished out of the gate. I'd actually be fine with that on the consoles since they rarely do free content updates via patches anyway.

          • reply
            April 2, 2012 5:27 PM

            what does this really mean though? You want Sony, MS and Nintendo to each do a huge amount of thorough playtesting (beyond the normal cert/basic functionality stuff) of the next 100 hour Fallout game to ensure higher quality? Assuming that the publisher doesn't use this new process as an excuse to do less QA themselves (iirc RomSteady mentioned this was exactly why cert ended up having a high cost, because certain companies were just submitting for cert over and over rather than doing proper QA on their side).

            • reply
              April 2, 2012 5:40 PM

              I'd rather have the developers and publishers of these games test and polish their stuff thoroughly and stop releasing releasing broken products early due to publisher demand and unreasonable and inflexible release dates. Obviously never going to happen because business is business and "when it's done" isn't always good business.

              The console manufacturers shouldn't have to do any rigorous testing if the product is sound when they get it for cert. Yet if they are going to continue to force certification processes for every little thing rather than adopt a more open approach like Steam as seems to be the current trend, then yeah. Deter game companies from taking the release broken fix later approach by any means necessary.

              On the PC side it the patching processes needs to be open because there are so many hardware and software configurations and they can't possible test all of them. A game designed for a specific console should be bulletproof by comparison.

              • reply
                April 2, 2012 5:45 PM

                right, so we know it's not going to 'just happen' from the dev/publisher side. So what is 'any means necessary' on the platform holder's side if not a massive QA effort of their own for each title? The only way to deter companies from releasing buggy games is to charge a high cert fee and have a super rigorous cert process (and having a quick and easy patching process like Steam and enforcing high quality releases at launch aren't really mutually exclusive concepts on the face of things). I don't see any good punishment after the fact working. Are you really going to go punish Activision for an exploit filled MW2 multiplayer when it's selling billions of dollars worth of software on your platforms?

                • reply
                  April 2, 2012 6:03 PM

                  I'm all for punishing Activision for anything MW2 related so I'm probably not the guy to be taking that question. MP betas for console releases have already been the norm. Start using them to actually test and fix exploits on a grand scale prior to release rather than having them be the mislabeled demos and promos that they are. The platform holder should not be responsible for another's broken product. I wouldn't say it's punishment, but rather teaching them to learn from their mistakes so they don't do it in the future.

                  It's been a slippery slope since consoles became online enabled and packed in HDDs for storage. And it's only going to get worse unless someone does something about it. Either get rid of the cert process entirely and let the developers fix their shit in a timely fashion and do whatever the fuck they want like on PC, or make them think twice about releasing a busted game.

                  Real punishment would not be charging them more for certification but a recall and replacement for all the defective games for every consumer. Why should games not be held up to the same standards as other products?

                  • reply
                    April 2, 2012 6:16 PM

                    I'm all for punishing Activision for anything MW2 related so I'm probably not the guy to be taking that question.

                    MW2 is hardly the only high profile offender. The recent Fallout games and Skyrim had plenty of bugs on both platforms. Punishing companies after the fact for releasing a product that ultimately made you many tens of millions of dollars? Good luck with that.

                    It's been a slippery slope since consoles became online enabled and packed in HDDs for storage. And it's only going to get worse unless someone does something about it. Either get rid of the cert process entirely and let the developers fix their shit in a timely fashion and do whatever the fuck they want like on PC, or make them think twice about releasing a busted game.

                    This just doesn't follow unless you're asserting that PC games are less buggy than console games modulo unforeseen bugs due to hardware variations. Like I said, an initial high quality cert process and then quick patching are not mutually exclusive concepts. Is Skyrim on PC now much higher quality than the 360 because of either initial higher quality or faster bug fix rate? Mass Effect? DX:HR? I'm not saying the quick patching model of Steam isn't great for a variety of reasons, but that doesn't make it a cure all for the things you're complaining about.

                    Real punishment would not be charging them more for certification but a recall and replacement for all the defective games for every consumer. Why should games not be held up to the same standards as other products?

                    Do you recall entire car lines every time there're a few little defects in certain models? As something grows in complexity the incidence of problems is going to increase, that's inevitable. This has always been true of software. A recall obviously accomplishes nothing that a patch couldn't, and is insanely expensive to a degree that no publisher would agree to those terms.

                    • reply
                      April 2, 2012 7:03 PM

                      You keep throwing around the concept of punishing a company after the fact like it's unheard of but aren't they already being punished with the current certification processes for patches and updates? Do you think it's not so bad because they are rolling in the dough even though it really hurts smaller developers and indies even more? When and why do you get to draw the line and say what's a fair punishment and what isn't? I don't understand the stance you are taking with this at all.

                      And yeah, Skyrim is and has consistently been higher quality on PC because they've been doing more frequent updates and fixes there first. At the outset too, remember the low texture bug when it was installed to the 360's HDD and how long that took to fix?

                      Bethesda has even started beta testing the changes for the console patches on PC before they submit them to certification. The 1.5 beta opt in had been going on for weeks and just officially came out on Steam a few days ago with the console release still TBD. Really smart of them to take advantage of the benefits of that platform and delivery system. Part of the reason the certification process sucks is because you have to wait so long for important and gamebreaking issues to be resolved. How long the Arkham City save bug was actually in cert after it was found and fixed?

                      Even with the opportunity for constant updates and fixes in a less costly and much timelier fashion, you still have publishers like EA holding back the PC fixes until the console ones are out of certification for simultaneous deployment. So sometimes it doesn't even matter and everyone gets the short end of the stick whether the platform has a cert process or not.

                      And vehicle recalls are incredibly common: http://www.recalls.gov/nhtsa.html
                      But I don't know why you'd even bothered to compare something so radically different.

                      • reply
                        April 2, 2012 7:17 PM

                        You keep throwing around the concept of punishing a company after the fact like it's unheard of but aren't they already being punished with the current certification processes for patches and updates?

                        That's my point, it's different to do it after the fact. To say before release 'we have a quality bar for releases on our platform and you need to do x,y,z to meet that, we charge a fee to check those features' is something that most people (aka publishers/devs) can understand the rationale for.

                        That's very different from 'so... I know you guys sold 18 million copies but your game is pretty buggy so we're going to fine you $500k.' So we met your cert requirements and sold a shitload of copies that made you a lot of money but because it was too buggy (by what metric?) you're fining us based on what scale?

                        Again, I'm differentiating from the initial cert on release vs constant quick patching as your initial comment was that you'd like to see higher quality releases out of the gate. So I'm imagining a system where you lower the bar for patches later but somehow raise the bar on initial quality. The latter meaning either a more comprehensive cert process or some means to punish developers after the fact if their initial release was buggy (but not stopping them from fixing those issues asap). So in the case of Skyrim, was the PC version significantly higher quality than the Xbox version on release? I doubt it. Yes there were some high profile bugs like the texture one you mentioned, but in terms of broken quests and scripting and whatever I highly doubt there was much that was platform specific. The PS3 had its own set of issues as I recall. In terms of higher quality, guaranteed to work out of the gate, that's usually a big part of why people prefer consoles over PC in the first place.

                        And vehicle recalls are incredibly common: http://www.recalls.gov/nhtsa.html
                        But I don't know why you'd even bothered to compare something so radically different.


                        They're not 'incredibly common' by any measure. They happen yes. They're a last resort. The reason I brought them up is they're an example of a non-software, consumer product with incredible complexity. That some things in a car break (early/often/whatever) is a fact of life with car ownership. Every little issue does not warrant a recall, nor does everyone go beating down the door at Ford the moment something in their car breaks. There're warranties and whatnot but there's a certain amount of fix ups that are expected when you own a car. This is a concept people have become accustomed to. There are relatively more or less issues with certain cars and that's certainly a criteria one uses when picking a vehicle but I think most people aren't naive enough to think they're going to buy a car and have literally 0 issues for years and years (whether under warranty or not). As software becomes increasingly complex the same issue arises but it's more difficult for people to internalize that complexity and its effects. There're a certain number of bugs that are simply inevitable when shipping millions of lines of new code on a cadence of a few years. This applies to games, operating systems, browsers, whatever.

            • reply
              April 2, 2012 6:06 PM

              I want to play a game that works without bugs. When you get a lightbulb, you expect it to just work when you get it or you demand a refund.

              • reply
                April 2, 2012 6:10 PM

                I can't believe my fucking car broke down! My rollerblades have been working flawlessly for years! Fuck Ford.

                • reply
                  April 2, 2012 6:58 PM

                  breakdown after time is a bit different, i'd say. Shouldn't you have a reasonable expectation that your car work correctly just after your purchase it? Wouldn't you be irritated if there were some major bugs with its performance? Things that possibly prevented you from using the car as you intended?

                  It would suck if you bought a car, and then had to take it to a shop a week after buying it for an update to make it work properly.

                  It's not a very good analogy. =/

                  • reply
                    April 2, 2012 7:04 PM

                    It's a horrible, laughable analogy.

          • reply
            April 2, 2012 5:55 PM

            Yeah, I was playing through Castlevania:LoS at launch on the PS3 and was thinking about how well polished it was. Until the corrupt save game bug got me when I was about halfway finished with the game. :(

            Reminded me of the time I got to the end of Dragon Warrior on the NES and took the cart to my neighbor's so he could watch me fight the end boss. Walked into the room and his baby sister had pulled the cart out and put in Super Mario 2. Yep. Wiped the save file. :(

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 6:11 PM

          If that is what you then don't cry when development and testing times triple. If you don't want to wait a few extra years for testing then you have to accept that bugs will happen. Complex software is going to have glitches no matter what you do. Just one example , NASA occasionally has to rewrite or patch portions of code on some of their probes that have been launched.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 6:31 PM

          You would so regret that if you got what you wished for.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 6:54 PM

          All this does is tell me you know shit about how software is made.

          • reply
            April 2, 2012 7:20 PM

            He must know a bit about it being a game developer and all.

            Maybe he moved on? He definitely knows more than my dumb ass who is can only derp on the fact that games are too often released before they are ready and it's not going to stop.

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 4:50 PM

        A fucking good D-pad.

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 4:54 PM

        A right thumbstick that is interchangeable with a trackball, which would enable snap aiming in shooters as well as mouse-like interfaces for games that would be good with them.

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 4:59 PM

        One common friends list / cross-platform multiplayer between all consoles + pc.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 6:25 PM

          Already exists. The shared friends list exists for 360 and PC on Live and between PC and PS3 on Steam. There are certain games that support cross-platform and for the most part that idea has flopped. The only game that it really worked in was Portal 2.

          • reply
            April 2, 2012 6:27 PM

            Not mention I am sure most of the new consoles will probably have a social media app for chatting also.

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 6:32 PM

        Weak hardware so that it forces more gamers into the PC camp, and I think I am going to get my wish.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 6:33 PM

          Oh, and whatever Microsoft does to the Xbox 720, make sure it works with the Xbox 360's controller.

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 8:59 PM

        Realistic wishes:

        Reliable hardware.
        DirectX 11.1
        12x bluray read speed drive.
        2gb ddr5 for gpu. 2gb for system.
        Hybrid storage. (SSD cached mechanical drive)
        Ability to use your own hard drive if you want to go full SSD.
        Minimum 720p @60fps with some sort of AA. (New TXAA algo from nvidia looks very promising)
        Wireless 802.11n
        7.1 HD audio (lpcm, dolby truhd, dts-hd)

        Pipe Dream:

        120hz capable output.
        Minimum 1080p@ 60fps w/ AA
        Tru2Way Support + DVR (No more renting cable boxes)
        4gb XDR2 gpu ram, 4gb system.
        BD-XL disc support. (128gb discs)
        802.11ac
        Biometric feedback controllers.
        Mouse + keyboard support with every game.
        Publisher ability to offer free DLC

    • reply
      April 2, 2012 5:05 PM

      It sounds like a lot of them want to be PC developers.

    • reply
      April 2, 2012 5:40 PM

      Picard & Riker love scene.

    • reply
      April 2, 2012 6:08 PM

      Other responses range from "a much more fluid means of providing updates to consumers"

      I think they're talking to Sony.

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 6:15 PM

        I was thinking Microsoft. Lots of patches for PS3 and PC are delayed because of their cert process.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 6:19 PM

          Depends on how you take it. I was thinking more of the actual patching process. Also, how would the Microsoft cert process (Sony has this as well) hold up other platforms?

          • reply
            April 2, 2012 6:24 PM

            I would think having every platform be on the same release cadence and version would make life easier for a developer. And when you're talking about a patch for something like a shooter with balance issues it keeps everyone in the community on the same page regardless of platform.

            • reply
              April 2, 2012 7:30 PM

              You would think. Patches for different platforms come out at different times regularly.

              • reply
                April 2, 2012 7:33 PM

                I'm sure, and I'm sure there are other cases where they prefer to hold off until everyone is ready to get it

                • reply
                  April 2, 2012 8:13 PM

                  Since there is hardly any cross platform play it doesn't really matter.

                  • reply
                    April 2, 2012 9:06 PM

                    I already mentioned a couple reasons it'd matter. If we're talking about a couple days difference that's one thing, if we're talking weeks or months then there're plenty of good reasons to wait until all platforms will be at parity.

                    • reply
                      April 2, 2012 9:22 PM

                      The platform that makes the most money is going to get the most attention and released first. It's pretty straightforward business.

                      • reply
                        April 2, 2012 9:29 PM

                        and yet you've got people in this very thread noting instances where it's happened, because there are obvious reasons to do it, since holding back a patch on one platform until the others are ready has very little to do with new revenue

                        • reply
                          April 2, 2012 10:05 PM

                          Do you really think it's the rule to hold back patches for simultaneous release? Do you know how cert works? You can never be 100% sure, so it only makes sense to hold back when you know it's all going to happen at once.

          • reply
            April 2, 2012 6:26 PM

            They tend to release the patch for all platforms at the same time so they are held back by the cert process.

            Sony's servers have always been slow as hell but the patch process isn't much different from Xbox patches. If you play it often it's not a big deal but if it sits for 6 months like my 360 did then you have to wait though an ass ton of updates.

            • reply
              April 2, 2012 7:31 PM

              Not my experience. The PS3 patches tend to take longer. Not only that, they download and then install.

    • reply
      April 2, 2012 7:18 PM

      Facebook integration Yes, just what games need! God I weep for our world.

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 7:21 PM

        yes, god forbid that with any new game I can quickly find my real friends to play with rather than asking them each individually for what screen name they used in a particular game

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 7:28 PM

          ehhhh I dont know too many people who use facebook for that. We have steam/xbl/psn friends lists already, good enough. I'd rather not advertise to the world that I"m playing starcraft2 or whatever. and vice versa I dont need to see that my friends are playing call of duty on my facebook feed

          • reply
            April 2, 2012 7:32 PM

            but you're just mashing together a bunch of stuff that doesn't have to be that way. Being able to invite someone to a game directly via their FB profile is different from having the game automatically spam your news feed with 'I'm playing videogames!!'

            You don't know many people who use FB for that because none of the games that use Steam/XBL allow that functionality so we all have a bunch of platform specific friends lists. Where as when you hop on a new iOS game (like Draw Something) people very much login with FB so they can quickly start playing with whoever else of their friends has the game.

          • reply
            April 2, 2012 7:35 PM

            [deleted]

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 9:30 PM

          Seriously, StarCraft 2's FB integration meant my friends list was instantly populated with a ton of people. That's the right way to do it.

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 7:37 PM

        I thought Facebook and Twitter integration died out in 2010, back when people were pissed off about being spammed by their friends playing Uncharted 2 and The Sims 3.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 7:44 PM

          no, because FB integration doesn't have to have anything to do with updating yours or anyone else's status

    • reply
      April 2, 2012 7:44 PM

      The ability to mod games. (I know it's a pipe dream)

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 8:14 PM

        Never going to happen.

        • reply
          April 2, 2012 8:21 PM

          UT3 tried, but it didn't take off, IIRC because the maps would've had to be certified with game updates. Custom content like the LittleBigPlanet maps is probably the closest that console titles will get, until things open up a little more.

          • reply
            April 2, 2012 9:06 PM

            and they won't ever open up I don't think, Sony and Microsoft are going to keep closing the door.

            • reply
              April 2, 2012 9:06 PM

              err....won't ever open up I think.....DAMN YOU EDIT BUTTON.....DAMN YOU DOUBLE NEGATIVES!!!

    • reply
      April 2, 2012 8:46 PM

      all I want is to not be a paid beta tester of code porting.

    • reply
      April 2, 2012 9:02 PM

      i just hope they come with very large hard drives... space is cheap now, and with so many things needing downloads i don't want to have to worry 'bout filling up my drive that came with my system.

      • reply
        April 2, 2012 9:31 PM

        I'd hope for 320-500gb standard. Downloads are such big business now that it behooves the hardware makers to give you room to buy stuff.

    • reply
      April 4, 2012 11:22 AM

      What a load of crap

Hello, Meet Lola