Alien: Isolation on Current-Gen Graphically Comparable to Next-Gen

Alien: Isolation on Current-Gen Graphically Comparable to Next-Gen

Alien: Isolation screen

Creative Assembly says that Alien: Isolation looked "almost identical" across platforms earlier in development.

Alien: Isolation developer Creative Assembly has come out to assure fans hoping to pick up its survival-horror Ridley Scott love letter on the Xbox 360 or PS3, that the "the core experience" of the game will be "identical" to those who choose to buy it on the PC, PS4 or Xbox One. Furthermore, they suggested that the current gen versions will be graphically comparable to next-gen, going so far as to say that earlier in development, "We used to be able to put them side by side and play guess the platform".

Creative lead Alistair Hope explained how the game's console development originated on Xbox 360 and PS3, and that early in development they looked almost identical. "We've been able to squeeze every last bit of power out of those old machines," he bragged.

He did admit that as they got later versions of the next-gen hardware, they were able to step up the next-gen versions a little, to the point where its easier to tell the difference across generations. "The core experience is identical, though," he stressed.

"For many years, the PS3 and 360 builds were our only console builds, so it was important to us that they would be great. That's why it's all done in-house," he continued.

Alien: Isolation is a survival horror game, announced this week, that is based off Ridley Scott's original Alien movie. It will be releasing on the PS3, Xbox 360, PS4, PC and Xbox One, but strangely, not the Wii U.

Hope seems to be pretty happy that he's able to make the current-gen versions look so good, but to me, this doesn't bode well for the next-gen versions. After all, what's the point in shelling out for a shiny new console if the games play exactly the same, and only look marginally better?

Source: Edge #263 via Videogamer

Permalink

Steven Bogos:

Alien: Isolation on Current-Gen Graphically Comparable to Next-Gen
Hope seems to be pretty happy that he's able to make the current-gen versions look so good, but to me, this doesn't bode well for the next-gen versions. After all, what's the point in shelling out for a shiny new console if the games play exactly the same, and only look marginally better?

Isn't this the point Yahtzee has been making for quite some time...?

argh, why the Wii U snub? If it works on a 360, it'll work on Wii U.
I'll get it on PC, but wait til a massive price driop.

DocZombie:

Steven Bogos:

Alien: Isolation on Current-Gen Graphically Comparable to Next-Gen
Hope seems to be pretty happy that he's able to make the current-gen versions look so good, but to me, this doesn't bode well for the next-gen versions. After all, what's the point in shelling out for a shiny new console if the games play exactly the same, and only look marginally better?

Isn't this the point Yahtzee has been making for quite some time...?

Yes, him amongst many many others because... well.. It is true and honestly if the new consoles had been pushed back a year and maybe even more, that still likely would not have changed it.

No love for the Wii U. I'm not gonna buy one but I know others have and purposely excluding it from the console line up when you're not a console exclusive seems like a real dick move.

Anyway, might pick it up for PC if it turns out to be any good. I do like me some xenomorph but Colonial Marines has me wary.

viranimus:

DocZombie:

Steven Bogos:

Alien: Isolation on Current-Gen Graphically Comparable to Next-Gen
Hope seems to be pretty happy that he's able to make the current-gen versions look so good, but to me, this doesn't bode well for the next-gen versions. After all, what's the point in shelling out for a shiny new console if the games play exactly the same, and only look marginally better?

Isn't this the point Yahtzee has been making for quite some time...?

Yes, him amongst many many others because... well.. It is true and honestly if the new consoles had been pushed back a year and maybe even more, that still likely would not have changed it.

While it's definitely true, I think people should really be caring about this. If someone already has a new system, there's no reason NOT to buy it for that, as they're the same price and it'll look a little bit better.

The big thing to remember though before people get their underwear in a bunch is that this is NOT a next gen game. They said it themselves, they were making it for PS360 and then eventually said, "Well we might as well give people more buying options, so we'll make it for every console... except WiiU, because screw that." For the next few years there's still a ton of devs that are focusing primarily on the 'current gen' stuff, meaning that a lot of the games coming out were never intended to look crazy on next gen. Spring is when the first wave of 'next gen' games are going to be coming (Titanfall, Infamous), and those games will either have trashy backports or none at all.

In other news, nothing has changed with cross gen leaps since the history of ever.

Mr Ink 5000:
argh, why the Wii U snub? If it works on a 360, it'll work on Wii U.
I'll get it on PC, but wait til a massive price driop.

Probably because more "serious" or "dark" games have typically struggled badly on the Wii and WiiU. It likely wouldn't be worth the cost of porting it.

TiberiusEsuriens:

In other news, nothing has changed with cross gen leaps since the history of ever.

Of this we are in agreement. I do not think that this was really being taken as a reasoning not to purchase the game. More that it is affirmation of known historical patterns that call back to those who were demanding "we NEED a new console generation" and those who would cite this common knowledge as to why it was not.

We know that development cycles will follow that same pattern revolving around hardware release. So this is getting pointed to because it is validation of that common knowledge that was repeatedly refuted by those who just wanted more horsepower, but really were not offering a valid reason why.

Much like it is conventional wisdom to not bother with purchasing a new gen console at its release because A: It will likely take longer for desirable/non ported games to be released for the console than it would take for its first (or maybe even second)major price reduction. B: System bugs and hardware failures have had time to be identified, diagnosed, repaired and otherwise avoided either from software or hardware. You can explain this to some people and they will still willingly pay more for potentially problematic hardware, effectively wait the same amount of time for desirable software and pay the premium for the privilege.

Damn, I'm already too late to quote Yahtzee and bemoan the lack of a Wii U version even though the game looks comparable to next-gen on the 360...So I'll take the low road and wonder out loud how different the final version will be from what we've seen so far! I don't really plan on getting this because I don't care too much for survival horror (specifically 1st-person) but if this thing releases and the headlines read "IT HAPPENED AGAIN" I may be more inclined to grab the PS3 version.

viranimus:
You can explain this to some people and they will still willingly pay more for potentially problematic hardware, effectively wait the same amount of time for desirable software and pay the premium for the privilege.

Very true. I personally have already gotten a new system, and my logic falls somewhere in between. I knew I was going to get one eventually, and since I wanted to get games that were coming out on new and old I went ahead and got one for that small boost in visual fidelity (or in AC4's case, massive. PS360 looks hilariously bad in comp). So far I haven't had to deal with any hardware hiccups, so consider me satisfied.

Granted, in a few years I'll get a new PC rig and laugh at everything else, but it would be a waste of money to upgrade that now.

So, what Creative Assembly are saying is that the game is cheaply put together and all versions are going to look like they crawled out from under a rock labelled 2008. As long as it's better the Colonial Marines.

Mr Ink 5000:
argh, why the Wii U snub?

Because by the end of the year when this comes out, there will likely be ten million plus PS4s out there and a similar number of Xbones. I'd be surprised if the Wii U is predicted to even hit 7.5 million total units sold this year, never mind that Nintendo consoles are a graveyard for third party releases to begin with.

well its not a fast paced action title and should often have deliberately cramped environments so you can probably push the graphics a bit further without stressing the hardware.

Still if they can do this for all the other versions I'd say do this for Wii U, but they won't and I'll be forever disappointed in them and probably wait for a review, I might buy it but probably no since I don't really support that kind of practice.

fix-the-spade:
So, what Creative Assembly are saying is that the game is cheaply put together and all versions are going to look like they crawled out from under a rock labelled 2008. As long as it's better the Colonial Marines.

Mr Ink 5000:
argh, why the Wii U snub?

Because by the end of the year when this comes out, there will likely be ten million plus PS4s out there and a similar number of Xbones. I'd be surprised if the Wii U is predicted to even hit 7.5 million total units sold this year, never mind that Nintendo consoles are a graveyard for third party releases to begin with.

it comes accross to me that you're saying 7.5Million like its nothing. Thats a lot of people wanting to play the console. Maybe for AAA games its too small an audience (what with 5 million sales being a fail in some cases), but for a smaller style project like this, thats still a big potential revenue.

Avaholic03:

Mr Ink 5000:
argh, why the Wii U snub? If it works on a 360, it'll work on Wii U.
I'll get it on PC, but wait til a massive price driop.

Probably because more "serious" or "dark" games have typically struggled badly on the Wii and WiiU. It likely wouldn't be worth the cost of porting it.

yeah such a shame. 3rd party was the biggest con when i weighed up buying the Wii U. although, being such a limit on "dark games" it could get all the "mature" Wii U owners attention (if its good)

Mr Ink 5000:

it comes accross to me that you're saying 7.5Million like its nothing. Thats a lot of people wanting to play the console. Maybe for AAA games its too small an audience (what with 5 million sales being a fail in some cases), but for a smaller style project like this, thats still a big potential revenue.

In the context of a new console release it is nothing. Hardware manufacturers expect to sell at least ten million units in the first twelve months, then another five million minimum every twelve months after that for four years or longer. The Wii U will optimistically be at three quarters of the twelve month target at twenty four months. Not only is it a small market, it's growing slowly.

Also, horror games in general have quite a small potential market, they consistently sell under four million copies be it Amnesia or Dead Space, realistically Isolation will not sell more than two. AVP2010 sold in the region of three and a half million and Colonial Marines half that, they are among the best selling Alien titled games ever, so nobody with a brain is expecting Isolation to break sales records.

To cap it all, Nintendo console buyers buy almost entirely first party games. Nintendo is where Call of Duty doesn't sell well, never mind an eighteen rated horror game, against that back drop spending funds on a Wii U is downright wasteful. Even if it adds less than ten percent to the total development cost, ever seeing that money back would be extremely unlikely.

fix-the-spade:

Mr Ink 5000:

it comes accross to me that you're saying 7.5Million like its nothing. Thats a lot of people wanting to play the console. Maybe for AAA games its too small an audience (what with 5 million sales being a fail in some cases), but for a smaller style project like this, thats still a big potential revenue.

In the context of a new console release it is nothing. Hardware manufacturers expect to sell at least ten million units in the first twelve months, then another five million minimum every twelve months after that for four years or longer. The Wii U will optimistically be at three quarters of the twelve month target at twenty four months. Not only is it a small market, it's growing slowly.

Also, horror games in general have quite a small potential market, they consistently sell under four million copies be it Amnesia or Dead Space, realistically Isolation will not sell more than two. AVP2010 sold in the region of three and a half million and Colonial Marines half that, they are among the best selling Alien titled games ever, so nobody with a brain is expecting Isolation to break sales records.

To cap it all, Nintendo console buyers buy almost entirely first party games. Nintendo is where Call of Duty doesn't sell well, never mind an eighteen rated horror game, against that back drop spending funds on a Wii U is downright wasteful. Even if it adds less than ten percent to the total development cost, ever seeing that money back would be extremely unlikely.

so paragraph 2 cancels out aragraph 1 there?

shame so few are willing to take the risk there. catch 22; the audience for 3rd party wont buy a Nintendo for 3rd party games, as there are not too many worth mentioning. 3rd parties wont make Nintendo games as the 3rd party audience are elswhere

Mr Ink 5000:
so paragraph 2 cancels out aragraph 1 there?

Not really, it just means that the small sales potential is even tinier on a Nintendo console, a small fraction of the smallest fraction of the market. You're unlikely to recoup the development costs when the most optimistic sales projection is under a hundred thousands copies sold.

Mr Ink 5000:
shame so few are willing to take the risk there. catch 22; the audience for 3rd party wont buy a Nintendo for 3rd party games, as there are not too many worth mentioning. 3rd parties wont make Nintendo games as the 3rd party audience are elsewhere

Indeed it is, but there is precedent in that major franchises (FIFA, Madden, COD etc) consistently sell poorly (or less well) on Nintendo hardware, not just recently, but all the way back to SNES days. Nintendo don't help, Nintendo SDKs are traditionally expensive and Nintendo rarely make any effort to subsidise or help market third party titles. They did Sony a huge favour in the nineties by not really paying attention to sports and motor racing games, pretty much every game advert on the television began with a Playstation logo because of it.

fix-the-spade:
-snip-

I'm struggling to get my head around the overall goal of 30 million units expected to shift within 5 years after release

Mr Ink 5000:

fix-the-spade:
-snip-

I'm struggling to get my head around the overall goal of 30 million units expected to shift within 5 years after release

For a games console it's not a huge target to shoot at, it's supposedly the minimum level at which a home console is profitable to manufacture and distribute, every console that hasn't made it has been considered a failure except for the Xbox.

The PS2 sold 70 million in 5 years.
PS3 has averaged 10 million-ish a year for seven years, although Sony haven't published as detailed sales figures they did for the PS2.
The 360 has a broadly similar total units sold to the PS3 but in eight years. Exact year by year figures for those two aren't clear but they were both well clear of 30million in five years. The original Xbox didn't make it, but Microsoft admitted ahead of time that the Xbox was a market share and learning excersise.

Of Nintendo's consoles only the Gamecube and Virtual Boy failed to break that figure (and the Wii U at this rate), although the N64 just squeaked it. All of their handhelds made it with time to spare including the 3DS which has done it with three years to go.

In fact the list of consoles that didn't sell 30 million in five years is pretty predictable.
N Gage
Gamecube
Dreamcast
Saturn
Gamegear
Virtual Boy

fix-the-spade:

Mr Ink 5000:

fix-the-spade:
-snip-

I'm struggling to get my head around the overall goal of 30 million units expected to shift within 5 years after release

For a games console it's not a huge target to shoot at, it's supposedly the minimum level at which a home console is profitable to manufacture and distribute, every console that hasn't made it has been considered a failure except for the Xbox.

The PS2 sold 70 million in 5 years.
PS3 has averaged 10 million-ish a year for seven years, although Sony haven't published as detailed sales figures they did for the PS2.
The 360 has a broadly similar total units sold to the PS3 but in eight years. Exact year by year figures for those two aren't clear but they were both well clear of 30million in five years. The original Xbox didn't make it, but Microsoft admitted ahead of time that the Xbox was a market share and learning excersise.

Of Nintendo's consoles only the Gamecube and Virtual Boy failed to break that figure (and the Wii U at this rate), although the N64 just squeaked it. All of their handhelds made it with time to spare including the 3DS which has done it with three years to go.

In fact the list of consoles that didn't sell 30 million in five years is pretty predictable.
N Gage
Gamecube
Dreamcast
Saturn
Gamegear
Virtual Boy

ah, my mistake, I thought you meant a game had to sell 30 million over 5 years to be profitable.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here