Are the 360 Launch Titles Actually Next-Gen?

An anonymous reader writes "1UP has a feature up entitled 'Is This Really The HD Era?' The article begs the question: How many of the games ported to the Xbox 360 (12 of the 18 launch titles were ports) are truly next gen, and how many are just trying to cash in on the hype of the new console? There are some interesting conclusions, but best are the quotes from Peter Moore explaining the HD Era throughout the whole thing: 'Next generation games will combine unprecedented audio and visual experiences to create worlds that are beyond real and they'll deliver storylines and game play so compelling that it will feel like living a lucid dream.' Right."

Of course not

[MilenCent]

Come on now. Are the X-Box 360 titles truly "next gen?" Depends on what your definition of "next gen" is.

Improved graphics? Sure as hell.

Improved gameplay? Wellll... no. Consider that, of what are widely considered to be the two best non-sports games, one is a sequel to an N64 game, and the other was shown at previous E3s in an N64 incarnation. One could thus say, indeed, that the best X-Box 360 games are last gen.

But by the definition of improved gameplay, just how many games are next gen from their era? Not a whole lot. Indeed, the games with the most engaging gameplay (I'm thinking most especially of Katamari) seem to be those that purposely recall previous generations.

Re:Truth

[jchenx]

You, when I first read the headline for the article, I thought it was going to be pretty biased garbage, but then reading through it, find it rather spot on. The games they focus on are ports, and it almost goes without saying that they're not going to look that great. Two big reasons:

1) They're first-gen titles. 'nuff said.
2) Companies spend most of their time and money on the "current-gen" products, and won't spend that much more on improving the next-gen version

Unfortunately, we won't be seeing a large quality jump until we get more next-gen systems, like the PS3. Game companies will tend to develop to the lowest common denominator. That's why a lot of cross-platform games just look fairly average, while console-specific titles (Ninja Gaiden for the Xbox, MGS3 for the PS2, etc.), look amazing for their respective platforms.

So, the original reason why I thought the article was garbage is because I've been only playing the first-party titles (Kameo, PDZ, and PGR3). Those games, especially PGR3, really showcase the system and how it is deserving of the "next gen" moniker. Ports? Not yet.

Since when?

[MMaestro]

Before the PS1 came out, "First Gen" titles usually, and rightfully, became instant classics. NES? Super Mario Bros 1 is considered to be the first classic game after Pong. Sega Master System? Phantasy Star 1 for early RPG fans. SNES, Super Mario World was beautiful, entertaining and the hidden star worlds were a treat. Sega Genesis, Sonic 1 showed that hardware was no longer a limit for bright, good looking, speedy-looking 2D games. N64, Super Mario 64 was a tech demo, a giant playground for people new to 3D and showed developers and gamers how to use 3D worlds effectively, oh and it was fun. Sega Saturn, Panzer Dragoon was artistic for its time with a huge (looking) world when games like Super Mario 64 was limited to fairly small areas.

PS1 had... FFVII which is really second generation since it came out almost 2 years after the PS1 did. PS2 had... SSX, a good looking fun game but hardly took advantage of the hardware. Xbox had Halo and even the most supportive fanboys generally agree that the game wasn't quite finished let alone polished (The Library level anyone? All that backtracking through old levels?). Xbox360 has 2 PC ports (Call of Duty 2 and Quake 4), yet another subpar FPS (Perfect Dark Zero) and another wave of EA Sports games.

Re:Truth

[__aaclcg7560]

Withholding critical information about their debugging hardware and APIs for their multiplayer hardware. Nintendo has standards but they don't tell you what the standards are (unlike Microsoft and Sony who provide too much information). If you do a pre-lot check, they won't tell you everything that they find that should be fixed for the final submission and your title will get rejected if you don't figure it out on your own. Trying to get a title through Nintendo was like getting a football through a minefield that's being bombed by friendly fire.

Before I left the game industry a few years ago, Nintendo starting being more helpful when it became painfully obvious that publishers strongly preferred PS2 and XBox over the GameCube. Hopefully, they learned their lesson from the GameCube and developer support for the Revolution will be similiar to Microsoft and Sony. If not, only Nintendo's titles will be popular on that console.

Where have I heard that before...

[Havenwar]

"Next generation games will combine unprecedented audio and visual experiences to create worlds that are beyond real and they'll deliver storylines and game play so compelling that it will feel like living a lucid dream."

Hmmm... Oh yeah... I have a game here that says something very similar on the back. You know, along the lines of "unprecedented video and audio" and "beyond real" and "live the game". It's for the Commodore 64... on a casette.

It didn't live up to the hype then... I doubt this will now. It was, however... quite fun to play. Quick controls, good game progression, easy to learn, annoying music. Hmmm... I need to go dig something out of the basement again.