Discuss the positive advances made this console generation.

Josey Wales

We are now in the last few months of the current console generation and we have all enjoyed plenty of great games. But along with so many great games there has been a number of new practices that have gotten a lot of criticism over the years. I'm thinking of online passes, day one DLC or just DLC in general. I'm sure there are more examples but I can't think of more right now and anyway, I want this to be a positive thread.

So let us focus on the positive and discuss what developments have happened during this generation that were good for us, the consumer.

Personally I like some of the more thoughtful use of online in games. Instead of simply sticking with simple player vs player modes some developers have taken it a step further. I'm thinking of the work EA has done with the Autolog feature that has been implemented across a few of their games. Then there is the clever integration of online in the Dark Souls / Demon's Souls games. While I didn't get too far into Dark Souls myself (just too damn hard) the couple of times I found my game invaded were incredibly tense experiences.

Any other good stuff to come along?

Grumpypants

PS+ is my personal favorite I have played a lot of games that I might not have been exposed to otherwise.

imitation

Oh Good call, the big problem with this console generation is that its such a long period that its tough to know where to begin !

I'll start small, wireless controllers I know they were available before, at the first 360s were wired, but its nice now they are universal, no more draping a cable over the room only to trip over it or knock over a cup of tea.

Evolution I saw one article talking about how the last COD game was advertised on mass in times square, and how this would have been unheard of a decade ago. Now I don't think COD represents all that is great about this generation, but its definitely become more mainstream and its more widespread among st adults.

Take mass effect for example, it tells a good story in a cinematic manner. The potential for video games to tell a story is amazing, it doesn't have the 2 hour limit the cinema has, nor the budget restrictions TV series have, you can get a cinematic story all in one place that will pull you in like nothing else. This just wasn't really possible years ago due to the technical limitations and the budget limitations.

Cheaper games New releases cost pretty much what they did 10 years ago, that's pretty impressive considering almost nothing else did that (houses and recession aside !). There is a more dramatic fall in price after a few months in most cases as well. Finally things like Steam sales and PS+ help so much.

Indie Games Its great that small teams of developers can once again make games, and there have been some brilliant ones in this gen, like Braid, Journey etc

More online features Sure, the previous gen had multiplayer gaming, but the features now are great, built in markets, features like netflix, community features etc are nice.

Josey Wales

Grumpypants wrote: »

PS+ is my personal favorite I have played a lot of games that I might not have been exposed to otherwise.

Can't believe I forgot that one. I've been a subscriber since the very beginning of the service but it is really only since they introduced the Instant Game Collection that it has really shown its true value. Amazing service.

GTR63

The fact this Gen lasted so long at least we got to see the consoles get maxxed out before everyone had moved on.

johnny_ultimate

Digital distribution and the interconnected rise of the independent developer is the biggest one. Advances in gaming are now happening through the creativity and boundary-pushing of an ever growing pool of developers. While this gen's greatest shame is the collapse of the 'middle-tier' games that were often some of the most wildly innovative titles out there, we can at least rest assured that that passing of an era has led to the growth of another. These are the titles that are pushing game design in electrifying directions, and while the mainstream is becoming more homogenized, there is no longer any valid reason to rely on it to provide you with thrills. There have been some high-profile innovators working on a larger scale too (stuff like Bioshock, Dark Souls etc...) but it's the little guys that are making most of the waves.

Also, and this is linked to digital distribution, is the beginnings of the collapse of regional barriers. Oddly enough the charge was led by Sony - the very same people who brought down Lik Sang not too many years ago. By making their consoles region free, they certainly opened the gateway for us to experience more games we wouldn't have without modding and import consoles previously. Unfortunately, Nintendo - whose DS was the definitive example of a region-free console - have taken a step backwards with the 3DS by region-locking it, but again assisted by digital tech more and more niche games are making it to the European market or being made import friendly (how likely did it seem last gen that seven or eight Cave shooters would receive Western or region free releases?). We're not at the stage of unrestricted access yet by any stretch of the imagination - given two of the major players still refuse to acknowledge the benefits of a border-free design - but hopefully Sony anyway will continue their policy of not punishing their most dedicated playerbase.

Myrddin

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Also, and this is linked to digital distribution, is the beginnings of the collapse of regional barriers.

Not sure I agree with that. There's plenty of content thats locked to certain regional marketplaces...& not only that, the variation in pricing between even the Irish marketplace & the UK's one (Xbox Live for example) shows that digital distribution, while convenient, certainly allows tighter exploitation control of markets that exist even within the same region.

Yes you can evade certain regional restrictions with the use of a non native profile, but even then you need purchasing points from the likes of US/JP to buy content, EU points may not work. This loophole may not last forever either. The good thing about all that is past purchases can now be linked to a purchasing profile, & re-downloaded on replacement consoles etc

Varik

EnterNow wrote: »

The good thing about all that is past purchases can now be linked to a purchasing profile, & re-downloaded on replacement consoles etc

Unless you're Nintendo.

Myrddin

Varik wrote: »

Unless you're Nintendo.

I think they have mentioned this is changing in the future no?

Retr0gamer

EnterNow wrote: »

I think they have mentioned this is changing in the future no?

Nope.

cloud493

Wireless controllers man coming as standard.
For me personally, actually getting into online games at all cos its easier.
Graphics.

GTR63

cloud493 wrote: »

Wireless controllers man coming as standard.
For me personally, actually getting into online games at all cos its easier.
Graphics.

For my 360 I always use a wired controller now, I just hated charging and recharging

Retr0gamer

No mention of achievements? I could live without them but some games make clever use of them and some people can't get enough of them.

hooradiation

DLC - content that would have never seen the light of day gets to be released by virtue of this system, and/or, we get even more content at a minimal price.

But, for some reason, this is bad.
Presumably, because gamers have a hard time outwitting posts and other inanimate objects.

Retr0gamer

Kiith

I'd probably say digital distribution as well, specifically Steam. It's completely changed how i buy and manage my games. Regular stores are pretty much obsolete for me these days, and i only go in when i'm occasionally looking for a console game.

hooradiation wrote: »

DLC - content that would have never seen the light of day gets to be released by virtue of this system, and/or, we get even more content at a minimal price.

But, for some reason, this is bad.

I'd have thought most people see DLC, when it's done well, as a good thing. There have been some great examples of how to do DLC right, and it can add massively to a game.

Unfortunately, most of the times it's not done well, or is content cut from the original game to be sold later, or on disc DLC. Nothing worse then having an ingame character tell you to help defeat an ancient evil in the nearby castle...but first got to www.bioware.com and buy it for $10.

Azza

Kiith wrote:

Unfortunately, most of the times it's not done well, or is content cut from the original game to be sold later, or on disc DLC. Nothing worse then having an ingame character tell you to help defeat an ancient evil in the nearby castle...but first got to www.bioware.com and buy it for $10.

No one likes content that's not done well be it a full game, an expansion pack of DLC. I agree alot of DLC is poor but there is some gems out there. Like the full games I check the reviews before hand.

However its not right to say or imply that most DLC is simply being cut from games simply to milk more money from gamers (although its a very common perception). There is no credible evidence for that.

If the option of DLC didn't exist then all that additional content we can now optional purchase as DLC would not be in the full game either. It would just simply not exist. No Javik or from Ashes in Mass Effect 3 at all for example, we would of never heard of the character or missed him for that matter.

Do agree that DLC should not be brought up in the manner it was in Dragon Age Origins as it simply breaks immersion, but off the top of my head I'm not aware of other games that have had in game characters tell the player about DLC. As far as I'm aware its not that common.

Kirby

Azza wrote: »

However its not right to say or imply that most DLC is simply being cut from games simply to milk more money from gamers (although its a very common perception). There is no credible evidence for that........and evidence that people provide me will be ignored due to a pretty graph that a developer showed me once..

Fixed your post there for you Azza.

For me, the most positive aspect of this console generation is the social aspect. And no, I don't mean twitter and facebook crap on your console. I mean chatting to people as you play games. Voice communication. Most of the people I know spend lots of time talking in parties to each other on xbox live even while playing different games.

Consoles were generally very solo affairs up until the 360 rolled around. Unless you had mates round, you were on your own. But the modern console experience is much more like that of a PC gamer. I found PC gaming a lot more social with Skype, Ventrilo, teamspeak, etc. being a normal part of gaming. I like that the consoles have moved towards that.

The PS4 needs to actually ship with a mic though. The ps3 not having one was a poor choice.

ShadowHearth

hooradiation wrote: »

DLC - content that would have never seen the light of day gets to be released by virtue of this system, and/or, we get even more content at a minimal price.

But, for some reason, this is bad.
Presumably, because gamers have a hard time outwitting posts and other inanimate objects.

Those are disliked, because like any good idea is being abused like ****. Putting the content, which should be in the game in the first place. Giving very low quality DLC for very high price. Paying 1/4 of the game for 4 multiplayer maps. Making colour changes on characters as DLC... Putting DLC on a Disc and make me pay for it. Most important, DLC almost completely killed a lovely thing, which was called EXPANSION.

cloud493

I have no quarrel with DLC when its good. Red dead does it right, GTA. People only react badly when its stuff thats either already in the game, or stuff that should just be in as standard/

ShadowHearth

cloud493 wrote: »

I have no quarrel with DLC when its good. Red dead does it right, GTA. People only react badly when its stuff thats either already in the game, or stuff that should just be in as standard/

Do GTA and Red dead redemptin even classified as DLC? Those look like an expansion packs as some of them you can buy as stand alone on a disc. Like that zombie thing for RDR?

Myrddin

EnterNow wrote: »

I think they have mentioned this is changing in the future no?

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Nope.

Are you sure?

Q. Can I Log Into My Nintendo Network Account on a Different Console?

A: No, you cannot. A Nintendo Network Account can only be used on the console where it was created. In the future, you will be able to use your Nintendo Network Account with future Nintendo consoles and other devices, such as PC's.

It sounds like they are planning on opening it up at some point?

imitation

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Do GTA and Red dead redemptin even classified as DLC? Those look like an expansion packs as some of them you can buy as stand alone on a disc. Like that zombie thing for RDR?

They were DLC for the 360 first, I think they were bundled onto disk a after couple of months where released.

Some DLC is ok to be fair, I liked alot of the stuff for ME2, although what you got for your money varied.

Stuff like clothes and outfits seem like a cynical money grab, but I think the market for these isn't the typical gamer who finishes the game and ditches it after hours, but somebody who really liked it and plays it.

I don't mind any of this when its clearly to consumers benefit, take league of legends for example, game play wise its complete free to play on the back of optional things like skins and some time saving currency boosts. And as there is effectively a cap on the currency you need before your effective its not pay to win.

The only foul one is to make a full priced game with little content and then charge for the DLC, but I think the uproar this creates seems to have kept it away, hopefully it will stay that way.

ShadowHearth

imitation wrote: »

They were DLC for the 360 first, I think they were bundled onto disk a after couple of months where released.

Some DLC is ok to be fair, I liked alot of the stuff for ME2, although what you got for your money varied.

Stuff like clothes and outfits seem like a cynical money grab, but I think the market for these isn't the typical gamer who finishes the game and ditches it after hours, but somebody who really liked it and plays it.

I don't mind any of this when its clearly to consumers benefit, take league of legends for example, game play wise its complete free to play on the back of optional things like skins and some time saving currency boosts. And as there is effectively a cap on the currency you need before your effective its not pay to win.

The only foul one is to make a full priced game with little content and then charge for the DLC, but I think the uproar this creates seems to have kept it away, hopefully it will stay that way.

Free to play model is not really dlc model at all.

DeSelby83

I think free to play has been a good thing for this generation, but only when its done right. No one likes pay to win but games like Team Fortress 2 , Dota, League of Legends and Planetside to an extent have been good for this generation I think.

Nody

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Free to play model is not really dlc model at all.

I disagree; both models rely on making small, (rather then a full blown expansion which require own DVDs due to size), cheap (most items fall in <20 if not <10 EUR price), accessible via ingame to purchase (but may lead to a website from there) style of content.

Lets not kid ourselves here, F2P games have to make as much profit as selling it normally as the costs are the same (i.e. game development, marketing, support, server park etc.) but the playerbase is usually higher (i.e. taking PS2 as example 10% of the total playerbase had/were using Station Cash at some point of time but those 10% have to spend enough to cover the full cost for all the people playing).

ShadowHearth

Nody wrote: »

I disagree; both models rely on making small, (rather then a full blown expansion which require own DVDs due to size), cheap (most items fall in <20 if not <10 EUR price), accessible via ingame to purchase (but may lead to a website from there) style of content.

Lets not kid ourselves here, F2P games have to make as much profit as selling it normally as the costs are the same (i.e. game development, marketing, support, server park etc.) but the playerbase is usually higher (i.e. taking PS2 as example 10% of the total playerbase had/were using Station Cash at some point of time but those 10% have to spend enough to cover the full cost for all the people playing).

you mixing micro transactions with DLC here m8.

imitation

ShadowHearth wrote: »

you mixing micro transactions with DLC here m8.

There is little difference between buying a tuxedo outfit in hitman and a skin in league of legends. I think its fair to to lump skins, weapons & extra missions under the general DLC heading, although there is a difference between them.

The point I was making earlier is that DLC isn't necessarily a bad thing, if people optionally buying stuff improves the game in someway for everybody (in LOLs case the f2p mode) then its good deal IMO.

Its important customers don't stand bad value though, or it will be detrimental.

ShadowHearth

imitation wrote: »

There is little difference between buying a tuxedo outfit in hitman and a skin in league of legends. I think its fair to to lump skins, weapons & extra missions under the general DLC heading, although there is a difference between them.

The point I was making earlier is that DLC isn't necessarily a bad thing, if people optionally buying stuff improves the game in someway for everybody (in LOLs case the f2p mode) then its good deal IMO.

Its important customers don't stand bad value though, or it will be detrimental.

Free to play content updates and DLC for full price release game are two different things.

In free to play game content updates are VITAL to keep gamers coming back to the game. A lot of the content is free too, like the same characters in LOL. You can use in game currency to buy them

A DLC in a full release game does not make it VITAL content for the game. It is an extra, which can be skipped or ignored. Cannot be added to your full game by some in game currency.

I think lads, you completely missing the point of DLC and Free to play Business model.

Azza

I'd like to reply to the DLC comments but I think I be derailing this thread.

Grumpypants

If you download it, it's DLC

Varik

Kiith wrote: »

Nothing worse then having an ingame character tell you to help defeat an ancient evil in the nearby castle...but first got to www.bioware.com and buy it for $10.