I think you’ve misunderstood me. I was solely talking about the hardware and I also gave credit to both VR and Dualsense on Sony’s part. And even though I said that many only want better graphics with their next console doesn’t mean that I also think they only want better looks in their games. Of course they want inovative games with great stories too. My point is that a lot of people who likes playstation and microsoft doesn’t want the next gen console to be a machine centered around for example motion controls, a tablet controller or even kinect as microsoft found out with the Xbox One. I’m even one of those people and I’m happy ps5 won’t be anything other than a console with better graphics. But I’m also happy Nintendo is doing something different.

I agree that Nintendo doesn’t offer great stories. But I do believe they offer the most inventive gameplay. Sony on the other hand deliveres incredible stories but the gameplay, although good is a lot of the time way more repetetive and similar to other recent games.

Have you seen the PS5 custom design?

Please share

Nothing compared to the complexity of the cell processors, a faster hardrive with a compression engine is not the same. A brand new processor architecture that hadn't been done before, now that's revolutionary.

rlow1

I'm sure if Sony could redo the PS3 they would have done something different, the Cell processor while powerful was overall hard to develop games for which led most 360 3rd party games looking and running better. It was also expensive, something like a $200-$300 loss per unit which led Sony to not making a profit on the system until 2010.

Not added any disagrees but I will give you the reason it sold well.

'Groundbreaking' is not limited to games alone. The vast majority of Switch's own games are Indies and niche Japanese games. It is the ports that make it groundbreaking.

Sony claimed Vita had the same graphical power as PS3 and the claim simply did not stick. Switch is the system to have built the bridge between home console and handheld and that is what makes it 'groundbreaking'. It is doing something any handheld prior to it was not capable of.

Games on Switch look just as good as they do on last gen systems (sometimes even better) and that has been perceived by the public as a groundbreaking technical accomplishment.

Also Blu-Ray now feels very outdated and backwards compared to the storage methods that Switch delivers which makes it hard to go back to my PS3.

Selling well doesn't make the hardware groundbreaking. It's third party ports also don't make it groundbreaking. The hardware in the Switch is mobile and we've known that the tech inside phones have been capable of handling console games for years. The only reason why devs don't port games to phones is because the market is completely different, and phones aren't all just for gaming. The Vita at that time was proving to be a portable PS3 with games like Uncharted, And Killzone. The unfortunate truth is SONY left it to die. It's not bridging anything, it's still very much a handheld even if you can hook it up to a tv, or if you can play some current gen games which again we've known for years that mobile tech can handle em. As for games looking better on Switch than they did last gen I can't take that seriously. There's nothing from Nintendo that looks as graphically amazing as Uncharted 2,3, or GOW3, and third party ports look like a blurry mess, ontop of having to downgrade a lot of other parts of a game to be able to run it in the first place. As for Blu-ray, I can give you that one since cartridges have surpassed em but they remain inexpensive compared to what Ninty is using

Vita was as graphically capable as the PS3. More so even. It wasn't as powerful in the CPU department.

How are software sales ground breaking? Their policies aren't particularly ground breaking, as they're just adopting what Sony has been using since the early PS3 days, and those were based on policies that Sony had for indie games back in the PS1 days. Indie game support was excellent on the Vita as well...up to the point Sony was even allowing homebrew to work officially on the system...which was eventually scrapped, probably because Sony was on the path to scrap the Vita.

Getting niche Japanese games on the Switch isn't particularly ground breaking. It's par for the course. Just like the Vita and the 3DS had them in spades, because that's where a lot of the Japanese user base plays.

"Games on Switch look just as good as they do on last gen systems (sometimes even better) "

That's great. But this is supposed to be their home console as well, and that was a primary thing the developer said made the Switch ground breaking. A portable system that can handle 14 year old graphics isn't exactly ground breaking. Cell phones before the Switch even released were able to do that. It's neither a technical accomplishment nor groundbreaking, just what's available with today's tech, and I haven't seen this overflow of the public considering that a groundbreaking technical achievement. In fact, this is the first time I've heard anyone state that it could match last gen graphics, although I think it can actually surpass them a bit.

"Also Blu-Ray now feels very outdated and backwards compared to the storage methods that Switch delivers which makes it hard to go back to my PS3."

So, a cart technology that was out years before Blu-ray was even conceived is more ground breaking? Again, it's just what's available today, and it's the practical way to deliver games on a portable. I guess those high speed Vita carts using essentially the same technology was way ahead of its time?

Blu-Ray is just a installation and DRM mechanism. Games do not play off them. It'd be more apt to say that the hard drive feels outdated, and I might actually agree with you to some degree, but it's a more practical solution for a non-portable system.

What have been the recent innovations in game design that really shook the mold?

360/PS3 introduced a lot of beloved franchises and its contributions to the entire gaming medium are obvious, most notably online more so than even the games themselves. Wii and WiiU did offer new play experiences, but as is the case with the WiiU, innovation isn’t always a marker for success.

Kinnect and Move never really took off, and VR is still in its infancy, but that’s what I would call an actual new gaming experience.

But PS4/360, while offering great games, were really really safe consoles.

PS5/series x will be amazing consoles that will both sit under my TV, but I can’t say they will offer experiences yet. The PS4/one didn't, so I’m going to wait and see before I say that. Maybe the PS4/one just weren’t the power jump needed to give devs that extra breathing room that the 360/PS3 did and the ps5/series x will give that breathing room, but I gotta see more.

"What have been the recent innovations in game design that really shook the mold"

There haven't been any. And that's the point. You're trying to prove your point that next gen hardware isn't breaking ground, before that hardware is even released. You expect games to come out before the system that show how it's going to be used to shift game design?

I don't expect a sudden jump from this gen to next, but I expect more than just being able to put the system on top of a table, and use it as a display. Those changes may take time to happen, but you aren't making your point by citing that we haven't seen this yet. The whole point of the new hardware set ups is to allow a change from what we have now....hence, ground breaking.

"Kinnect and Move never really took off"

That doesn't make them any less ground breaking. But it's a good example of how sometimes it takes time to show full potential. Move or similar motion type controls, are now used as a common way for VR input. Ground breaking doesn't have to become mainstream to be considered as such. In reference to next gen, the systems are designed to push past current game design paradigms. Actual games may not represent it as directly as you need to show this, but it's still there, and certainly much more ground breaking than Nintendo using older hardware, which happens to have a dock to put their portable system in, and a stand so you can keep it upright on a table....something I did with some random piece of plastic I found around the house so I could watch videos on it years before the Switch was even conceived.

"But PS4/360, while offering great games, were really really safe consoles."

I agree, and it's why I'm more excited for next gen, than I was for this gen before it started. Go back in my history, and you'll see plenty of comments where I state that next gen was that gen with a prettier coat of paint, and it's my biggest impetus for being critical of MS plans to do cross gen for the first year or two.

Yeah, its an evolution, not a revolution. A couple of tweaks and changes, still not considered groundbreaking since both SEGA and SONY did it before Nintendo.
I do like how the Switch allows you to remove the controllers, but the JoyCons are still sub-optimal. However, the Pro Controller is really nice.

I treat my Vita as a Switch, take out the memory card, slap it into my PS TV and its the same damn thing. Once again, years before the Switch. The 'instantaneous' aspect about Switch is nice, but let's not blow it out of proportion here.

PSP Go did allow users to dock the device and play games on the TV using a DS3 controller. The real downside to that whole setup is that believe it or not you needed a PS3 to pair a DS3 to the PSP Go. So it wasn't perfect, but it was certainly a Switch-like idea that pre-dated Switch's launch by nearly 7 years!

Additionally there was the Xperia Play and of course PS Vita which not only played select PS3 games like PSP did but also basically all PS4 games via video streaming. Some Vita games were made by the same teams at the same time for both the PS3 and Vita. This was the first time that the same teams worked on the same games for two radically different devices with the final results being sometimes nearly identical to the home console versions. I did a Killzone 2 vs Killzone Mercenaries comparison a few years ago. It's a comparison I'm pretty proud of, along with my PS3 vs PS Vita WipEout game comparisons.

Switch is more powerful that Vita by a very wide margin, but it's still appreciably weaker than PS3 hardware. Phones GPUs push past the limitations of the RSX so much so that they can now safely usurp last generation graphics fidelity in very select situations. GRID Autosport is one of those possible examples! Tegra X1 hardware cannot even display some of that title's most taxing visual features like "Advanced Fog" which at least works on phones (at a massive and basically unacceptable cost to performance but at least it works).

Ok so maybe it's hard to call it a "revolution" but this is the first time this concept has really worked in the mass market because it's become MUCH more convenient than it ever was before.