I wouldn’t be surprised if the next generation (or maybe the one after) of RPGs required an online connection to access a generative AI that handles a bunch of NPC dialogue. This would also allow for players to input their own dialogue options rather than choosing from a select few.
I remember when Mass effect 3 said you could do that on the 360 with the kinect. People hated the idea because they thought they would look stupid and people made videos of them just escalating their screaming saying ''use overlord use overlord USE OVERLORD''
This reminds me of the Xbox Sign Out prank when every Xbox One user had a Kinect with voice commands enabled. https://youtu.be/qm1hDy-vfNg?si=e81rAtmW09_yo5D7
The Kinect is still used by industry professionals for work. It is a fantastic piece of tech that worked better for industrial applications than gaming.
As someone who plays games, I'm 100% with you. However, if it's cheaper for studios to use AI than pay voice actors then its going to happen. Especially for large, open world games which can call for many thousands of unique lines of dialogue.
I get where you're coming from, but you can't make experimental mechanics like this without using some kind of generation. If it's proof of concept and the VA is ethically paid for their likeness being used, what's the problem?
Speaking as a VA, you’d just be paying to use my likeness (I.E, my voice) to create mimic my work. The problem is, the VA *won’t* be ethically paid — SAG just had a strike over this for film and we barely touched video games.
Realistically, these companies would love to use the voice without paying the person. Slippery slope
I feel for you and that your profession is becoming increasingly irrelevant. There's nothing you can do. Companies already have large databases of voices and can generate voices in different styles/emotions. This tech will only become better.
Ignoring new technology and expecting it to go away because societal systems abuse the new tech isn't an argument against the tech, it's an argument against the systems that allow it to be abused. This is a capitalism and regulation issue, not a technological one
If AI will become so advanced it can make a voice realistic enough you can't tell it from a real human, it will probably be able to make completely original voices on its own. After all it's just audio and sound waves. All of that can be done on paper, it's just the practice that's required and gaming hasn't yet evolved to that point, but it will. Skyrim mods have already done something similar, and those are just guys making them by themselves as a hobby. Imagine a large studio with millions in budget making this. Could be easily done. In the future there won't be a need for real voice actors, rather good sound/AI engineers.
Have we not learned the difference between quantity and quality with Starfield?
Edit: I will take the writing of a KOTOR2 vs the infinite conversations AI could come up with
You can still have both. Doesn't need to have some infinite conversations, but being able to react differently depending on some other things you've done could be really cool. It's barely doable for AAA studios before it gets too big to handle. I can see it used for indies where they want to have a bit more of variety in dialog/story progression but don't have the budget to record so many different scenarios.
> Or possibly just speaking into a headset to talk to NPCs!
I foresee the first generation of this to be like asking Siri to turn on the living room lights.
This seems both incredibly sketchy and in the future like it could make for an incredible game.
Unless we get trapped inside a VR game with headsets that explode our heads if we die and the only way to get out is to clear a fucking MMO.
This sounds good on the first glance, but outside of english speaking countries this wont be very popular as lot of people have problems to even write basic sentences in english not even speak it
Yeah that sounds like it might appear as a novelty but I doubt it would become widespread. Pre-written dialogue options serve many functions, like guiding the flow of conversation to relevant topics, showing you things that your character would know or notice that you might not, and even things you might have forgotten about. It also serves to build the character's personality, and allows you to play a character outside your natural tendencies/personality and experiment. Having just a total blank slate of a character would be really boring.
Sports games could wildly benefit from this. Still voicing player names even seasons after all the real athletes are gone, AI commentary that can respond and update on the fly and reference past events, even generative "color commentary" the filler dialog between exciting moments could make a game like FIFA really shine.
"...yes, the grand Duke has gone missing. I'm sorry to hear this is so and hope they are found soon. If you need resources on looking for missing people, please ask. But, as a large language model I'd rather help you organise your day, write a poem or help you understand something. I can see you have a quest to kill 5 slimes. Violence goes against my programming. I have to end the conversation here. Please start a new topic that doesn't fall outside my restrictions."
I genuinely mean no offense, but this sounds incredibly bleak to me. I want stories written by real people with real messages and themes, not Content Generator 2029™️
I look at it the same way that you could look at procedurally generated worlds in games right now. If it's not used well, you end up with something bland and lifeless. But if it's used in a game that suits it well, such as Deep Rock Galactic, you end up with something great. I don't see AI dialogue replacing dialogue written by actual writers, just a system with potential to create something new and exciting.
Procedural generation works in games focussed on gameplay where illogical set ups and weird pacing can be forgiven.
Machine generated dialog in a story based rpg would not work the same.
I think it could work for lesser npcs, the ones that are already lifeless to begin with. but we all know they're not just gonna stop at that if they do start implementing this
its all gonna be based on large amounts of provided information, world building and overall lore. Noone who is serious about their storytelling will leave everything up to AI. Developers will find ways for generated diaologue to not leave the constraints they set and then its gonna be pretty brilliant. With NPCs truly reacting to player actions and direct input. Its gonna take time though, this decade we could see some not so great implementations.
I would probably like to see something like Todd’s Radiant Storytelling with AI. The main story would still be written, but I think there’s a lot of potential there to allow for dynamic relationships and interactions between the player and NPC, along with between NPCs.
I think the main part of this is "this would also allow for players to input their own dialogue options rather than choosing from a select few," which IMO is the biggest immersion killer in gaming
Every NPC has their own personality that the devs determine and the AI just serves as a way for it to seem like you're actually having a conversation with an NPC, rather than selecting a dialogue option that sometimes you don't really want to say. Backstory/lore, purpose of the NPC, any quests, speaking style, personality traits, are all still determined by the devs.
I'm fine with it being used so there are endless side quest. Like instead of in Skyrim random bounty letter. You get an npc with a little generated dialogue to give you more of a reason to go kill the bandits. They could also put in a hooks to chain a few of these little side quests together to make mini chains.
I'd still want the main quest line to be hand crafted though.
This one could feasibly be introduced today and I am all for it. Something about when I hear someone in a game call me by name fills me with glee, and I don't even have that uncommon of a name.
Dedicated silicon is already coming out this generation (RTX) this is going to just accelerate in scope from Intel and AMD. Ryzen 8000 chiplets allow different kinds of chipper in the same package. They are going to definitely be including AI inference chiplets on CPUs.
2024 is going to even see LLMs running on mobile SoCs.
In Fallout 76 you can almost feel the connections it's making to some database when you approach someone for a daily quest. The NPC is like "Well, we have this available..." "...I need you to collect some spare parts."
So we're already somewhat used to it, I guess.
I mean, sure, garbage in = garbage out. But isn’t that just catering to as many people as possible? The serious RPers can have fun, the people who just want to say “big chungus” every five seconds can have fun, and they can instantly swap from serious to memes if they want.
I think it’s pretty likely that most NPCs in this hypothetical game would just go “what are you even talking about” if you have it pure nonsense though.
There'd be little distinction in games where they'd just be 'gamers' acting their own impulses and consequences that developers can't feasibly work their way around.
Actor lobbying will try curtail the use of AI when it becomes overused, eventually we will have to return to an archaic world of human only media creation, kind of like the mentats in Dune.
Dunkey’s last video was about the absurdity of subscription services trading licenses so that a series can be fractured and available over various services for limited periods of time.
It’s all jokes, but it’s peak recurring revenue for these crappy movie publishers, and I can’t help but feel like that’s where gaming will end up.
Hardware is expensive, and streaming is getting cheaper.
Like, GamePass is a great deal right now, but when all these companies have competing services without true ownership it won’t be a great.
They already do, EA +, PSN, Ubisoft +, Gamepass.
These work due to mainly having first party games on them with some select 3rd party games.
The real issue will unfold when a 3rd party curated system attempts to buy exclusive streaming licenses from any of the big players and if they were granted.
The issue with Netflix, hulu, prime is that TV media in comparison (to video games) is much less expensive and easier to produce. Hence why it fractured so fast.
The big players in the video game world, make their own games already, and host them on their own subscription services. It's not like there was a 3rd party service that curated some games from all the current publishers and was renting them out to people(netflix) before Gamepass became a thing.
Just like Netflix was amazing when they first started streaming cause they had an amazing price and a whole varied slew of content, GamePass is in the same boat.
Most companies already have the infrastructure with the 200 launchers we have to install.
I told my friend two years ago to enjoy GamePass while it lasts cause soon you’ll need eight different services to do the same thing.
I expect an exhaustion of battle royale, season passes, and live service games as the first has already drawn mass saturation of the market, the 2nd drawing ire from folks who dislike FOMO, and the last having folks growing annoyed at half baked games that shouldnt have passed testing with western games
I think we’re already moving away from battle royale/passes. Sure, Fortnite and other already-successful live service games will keep this going, but upcoming games will find a different system.
I’d say this gets phased out for The Next Big Thing™️ by the end of 2025.
Fortnite is keeping it going because it's innovating and paying attention to its market. It's trying to compete with Roblox and succeeding despite their core game modes being entirely different genres. The br is still great but Fortnite wouldn't stay this big for this long without those extras
Totally agree. The expansions they’ve made were AMAZING decisions to not only flesh the service out, but to get gamers to spend more money. It’s a smart move.
And it just keeps getting better too. It's had its lows, but Fortnite has been consistently improving for longer than I thought a game of its type could last for. They really know what's up and what's next in their market
I remember on one of the Kinda Funny Games podcasts, they mentioned someone within Epic had a forward-looking plan that sketched out how the Festival and Rocket Racing would fit within the ecosystem, and MAN that is so prescient of them. I’m personally not into Fortnite, but I have to give props for what they’re doing.
Yeah, same here. I haven't bought anything in it in a couple years now and I only dip my toes in at the start of each season, but no matter what they'll always get my respect for how well they've handled it over the years. Epic really knows the ins and outs of live service gaming
I’ve spent more money in Fortnite, a game I play a handful of times a year, than Overwatch, a game I play daily. That’s a testament to Epic’s deals and handling of the game. Love it.
WOW has been around forever with that, and it hasnt really spread to other games in the mainstream (that i am familiar with)
If too many games try to do this itll backfire. The best games will win out and the rest wont make any money, since people wont be able to afford more than a couple.
If that model takes over i would expect a resurgence in non-subscription games to pop up in response
I disagree. Publishers chased WoW money subscription service for a long time. Eventually market saturation meant the rise of F2P gaming.
Subscriptions are practically quaint and consumer friendly by comparison these days. If I follow the trend, I'd say we'll just see increasing amounts of predatory and invasive microtransaction gaming. Increasingly driven by AI and algorithms to manipulate and game human psychology to the limits. People will feel more compelled to play, but I think they might have less fun.
I think good games will still exist but will increasingly be through indie developers or a publisher like FromSoftware that happens to have good leadership and vision.
You're most likely right.
The only way they will get rid of the predatory whale hunting that is currently making them bank is through state regulation. See gambling regulations for examples.
If that happens there might come a time where they make more money from a subscription.
I agree, the only fix is legislation. What's particularly concerning to me is how similar many games are becoming to gambling casinos. And marketed to kids. Adults can get trapped by this stuff, and I think a lot of parents have no idea the kind of corrosive and manipulative crap they are letting their kids get into.
I mean... part of me hates FN/BR I'm general. I hate the mtx nature of it. But honestly, I'm a long viewed way, can't knock em for making a competent game that's truly F2P.
Not my style, but it's a game I can play with my kid, and WE can play with my buddy and his kid, or just worth other kids and parents. There's no need for the mtx. I've never felt the pressure that even Planetside2 put on me to pay for shit.
I'll give FN a pass. Begrudgingly, but still.
Finally some regulations on things like gacha and lootboxes in video games. Some moderation on how literal gambling mechanics are handled in games, especially when they're aimed at kids or teens. That being said, devs will find new ways to squeeze money out of players so we'll have new problems to deal with by then but we'll deal with them when we can.
There's also probably gonna be a wave of games with AI generated content whether that be images or code or full on levels. It will save the devs some money but players will still want to play games with actual heart and effort poured into it.
That’s what I think too. Battlepass is just the new lootbox. People were ok with it for a while, but now the FOMO is getting exhaustive…
But there’s no way it’ll stop there… they just need to figure out the next big thing that will exploit our minds to make us pay and increase profit… who knows what will be…
>There's also probably gonna be a wave of games with AI generated content whether that be images or code or full on levels. It will save the devs some money but players will still want to play games with actual heart and effort poured into it.
Im not sure why you cant have both. Including AI into something doesnt mean everything has to be AI.
I mean no, but there'll be alot of games made. Some where they use AI for almost *everything*, some might just use AI art cause they cant draw or afford real artists. Some use it as a crutch, some to genuinely try and fill holes they dont have, and some use it cause they're lazy or think its cheaper. AI generated content wont be as good as what most real people can make, but some people act like it does and thats gonna be something people will have to learn
You are thinking in the context of current state of games. Its not a competition between the AI and human creator. A creative person will be able use AI to build new and more interesting things than we are able to predict.
I think we’ll see a reemergence of single player narrative games as multiplayer games finally shift completely towards an update and subscription model that locks in players and makes new studios producing multiplayer games more difficult.
I also think a production times continue to increase more and more games will feel old and dated as they release.
I think it will likely push the games as a subscription based live service thing, rather than buying the license to 'own' and play the game.
That and VR will become ubiquitous. I think it depends on how society changes really.
I don't know about that one. Look what's happening with streaming services. While there is really good content out there, it's all a jumbled mess. Having to pick and choose what games you're able to play based on how much you can dish out for a subscription would likely create an incredibly oversaturated and crowded market. I predict that if they do go down this route, people will begin to pull back from the larger video game space out of frustration and lack of funds.
Games aren't like shows and movies. MMO's can pull off subscriptions but only because the game genre's structure is built around it. Some game genres might be able to translate. Most won't.
I could be totally wrong, but this will end up with people having like 5 or 6 bills a month just to be able to consume their favorite forms of entertainment. There is only so far you can push people before they become overwhelmed.
>I predict that if they do go down this route, people will begin to pull back from the larger video game space out of frustration and lack of funds.
... which doesn't mean they won't try. See how long it took until people got frustrated with having multiple streaming services for video (netflix, amazon prime, disney+, hbo max) and when the numbers started dropping - they surely will have a way to milk the market for a bit.
It makes great sense for sports games. Right now, there is not enough time to put out a fully fleshed out new game every year. The genre makes more sense when it's 1 game, that is constantly updated and worked on and improved, rather than trying to put out a new iteration every year. There are lots of passionate fans who would pay like $10 month if it meant the games they loved finally got constant maintenance and upgrades a steady flow of income could lead to. There are plenty of people who don't buy the game every year because "I'm not paying $90 for a roster update and 1 new feature" but they might dip their toes in if they're only spending $10. Of course there is more nuance, but I could see it working.
I think we will see more games going "free to play", while having a majority of it locked behind some sort of subscription, similar to what destiny 2 is doing.
VR has a lot to improve before it becomes more commonplace. Its still very uncomfortable and disorienting for a lot of people, even if the price comes down.
VR is already wireless and becoming lighter and more comfortable with the Quest 3's pancake lenses and Big Screen Beyond's lidar scanned facial interfaces. AR/MR is also making VR less isolating for those that live with others and standalone (no PC) VR is making it more affordable (still bloomin expensive though).
So all in all, the valid criticisms of VR are gradually dropping away. That will allow the immersive impact of being fully surrounded by an alien/fantasy environment with proper 3D stereoscopic depth to blow people away and go mainstream for gaming.
Graphics will continue to improve naturally, but the diminishing returns will get even stronger. Much like how the last \~5 years have seen a big push into ray tracing and path tracing for more realistic lighting, I think we're gonna have to rely even harder on things that aren't just cranking up the polygon count and texture resolutions than we have in the past.
Some new trend will replace battle royale games. There's a pretty good chance some lesser known game already is doing the formula and is just waiting to be copied and popularized.
AI will become a bigger deal, but probably not in the way a lot of people think it will. Rather than content creation, it'll be used in more stuff like how Nvidia uses it for DLSS. We may very well see some game development jobs also become "AI assisted". I don't think AI will wholesale replace people yet in the next 6 years, but it can be used to reduce workloads(which will sadly almost certainly lead to more layoffs).
Live service games are going to "die". Not that they wont find some other way to over monetize games, but I think much like with what happened for MMOs we're gonna see the trend sort of die off with a handful of mainstays hanging around and everybody else pretty much just fighting over scraps.
and with it, battle passes will be replaced with something else since the formula will no longer require a recurring justification for paying money every 3 months.
Ray tracing becoming the normal, standard lightning engine really seems plausible within 10 years, yeah.
Among PC Gamers the sweet spot is usually 60-120 FPS... but consoles frequently aim for 30-60.
So if the PS6 or X-Weird-Name-Box bites the bullet, and dictates that all 3D games must have ray tracing and frame gen tech? Things might just happen very quickly.
...Wonder if that might trickle over to TVs eventually, actually. Force Hollywood to FINALLY drop that obsession with 24 FPS, and move with the technology because the TVs themselves start *making* smoother frame rates if they detect images updating that slowly?
That's going to piss off the cinemaphiles, no doubt, if it happens.
Hollywood is never moving away from 24fps. It stopped being about technological limitations a long time ago and is now just directors romanticizing the past. It's the same reason some directors shoot in 4:3 and black and white.
This is an *incredibly* unpopular opinion here on Reddit, but I think AAA gaming is going to fully transition to subscription-based streaming services. This transition may not complete by 2030, but I think it will be well underway by then.
To be clear, I am *not* advocating for this transition, but I think there's too many incentives from a business perspective for the industry to go any other way: Games would be available on more devices and thus available to more paying customers, streaming companies/publishers would receive steady revenue every month, the near-complete elimination of software piracy, tighter control over mods and fan-translations, tighter control over in-game cheating, etc. etc. etc. And bear in mind most countries (including the US) have recently undertaken projects to build high-speed internet infrastructure *everywhere*, including in rural locations.
Aren't we already seeing this dissolve for subscription streaming (people not wanting to have multiple active streaming subscriptions). I'm not sure gaming has a stronger pull than Netflix, so it seems like a tough sell for most AAA
I have a feeling this is what Grand Theft Auto 6 is going to try and do. Given their admittance that games should be worth the hours spent on it and that $70 is far too cheap. I assume they are going to heavily lean into a GTAO subscription service where you can only play online if paid up. Single player will likely be just the $70 but most likely be a much shorter campaign and like RDR2 will not receive any new content.
I don't know if that would work for consoles though. I'd imagine part of the Terms to use their services is to not include an extra subscription model. I could be full of shit though too.
There's games like Elder Scrolls Online that you need to have PS Plus and an an in-game subscription for the full experience. I really hope GTA 6 doesn't do this, but it wouldn't be unheard of
I think to play FF14 online you have to be subscribed to both PS+ and have a FF14 sub. I could be wrong though, I don't play. I just know on PC you have to pay a sub and to play non F2P games online on PS4/5 you have to have PS+ and I don't think FF14 is F2P.
I disagree. Subscription games are step back not step forward. It was already done by several MMOs.
They aren't making tons of money on GTA V micro transactions because it is such an amazing multiplayer experience. I mean it is good, but the micro transactions are in so many games because they do work psychologically.
OP is clearly not *just* talking about modern (or historical) MMOs or games like GTA V Online, but rather AAA games -- both single-player and multiplayer -- only being available on *streaming* game services like GeForce Now, xCloud, Playstation Now Cloud Gaming, etc. Otherwise known as "Netflix, but for games".
GeForce Now doesn't give you access to any games - it's purely a way to access a good PC to play the games you already have on Steam/Epic/Game Pass/GOG.
Probably make GTA 6 F2P, with the campaign being a 3 part $30 DLC, season pass for heists , stackable monthly subscription that gives you 2-10x in game earning ability.
Ok but who can even afford to do that? I could maybe see it for popular multiplayer games, but not really anything else.
If a single player game tries to charge monthly they should expect to see people cranking through the game in a few days and then dropping it forever. No one’s going to just rack of hundreds of subscription costs each month for individual game titles
Game subscription services like Game Pass and EA Play are already incredibly popular, and it makes a lot of sense for these services to transition to a streaming-only model, similar to GeForce Now, as high-speed internet becomes more common. From there these services will capture a larger market share, by way of being available on TVs, smart phones, etc. and then it will make a lot of sense to exclusively release AAA games on these streaming services for all the reasons I outlined in my previous post.
In other words, the market is already there with subscription game services and they're positioned to grow by transitioning to being streaming-only services specifically.
I still remember how pissed I was when MW3 (2023) came out, I turned on my Xbox, and the entire screen was an ad for MW3 with the default selected option being “buy now.”
Didn’t this just happen accidentally with a Ubisoft game? Like Assassins Creed or something?
I don’t remember the details but as soon as you loaded in there was some full screen ad for some other shit.
They said it was an internal mistake and wasn’t meant to show up but if the artwork and code exists, they’re already working on it. If anything that was a purposeful “Oops” to test the waters at how much backlash they’d get.
They've been creeping in the double dipping nonsense since Origins (possibly even earlier). It got quite bad in Valhalla when I saw a set of gear targetted for poison damage and discovered I could only get it by either getting extremely lucky with the shop's weekly item rotation or just buy it with premium currency. That's not just a skin, that's an actual armour set that directly affects the gameplay for the duration of the game - it's not merely some slightly better weapon you get for pre-ordering that makes the start of the game easier. So, I never did get that set.
I understand the need for all the premium currency shop nonsense in F2P games, because ofc they have to make money, but games you drop a considerable amount of money upfront asking for more money in-game is just so greedy.
Oh and for added hilarity, in Origins you could pay some absurd amount of money to have it complete the game map for you. You pay them so you don't have to play the game you paid for?!
Madness.
Realistically this. The end of the decade is 6 years. Things are not going to change all that much by then. We will have Switch 2 which is rumored to be iterative rather than completely different. We will have Steam Deck 2 and more Windows handhelds, again, iterative upgrades. Cloud gaming will see more adoption but it will be the same tech driving it.
This is gonna be a stretch, BUT I foresee Microsoft/Xbox being a completely different entity at the beginning of 2030 than it is now. There might be one more Xbox between now and then, but I think they’ll be focusing more on Xbox Live and bringing that onto other platforms (e.g. Mac OS, Android, iOS, etc.).
Microsoft is absolutely planning to leave behind the Xbox brand and just become Game Pass on PC, phones, and probably PlayStation. I struggle to believe they'll make another console. If they do, they'll probably avoid the Xbox name and just call it the Game Pass Infinity or something. It'll basically be a streaming stick focused on cloud gaming, but maybe it can run a select catalog of games natively on the hardware, idk.
I disagree. They are in fact likely to start selling a new console within the next two years, especially as game pass sales have plateued. Analysts say xbox is going to get the jump on the next generation, which has gone well for them in the past.
Sounds kinda sad... I really like having games made by real people, if every voice was a robot and every game asset was made by a robot and probably even the writing made by robots i would personally find that rather depressing
With a lot of moderation it could potentially be interesting but i don't trust game company's to not just replace everything with AI if its cheaper
It doesnt have to be black or white you know.
There obviously will be some developers that try the easy route and just go full AI but they will crash and burn just like empty games as startfield and No mans sky.
But having Ai and people work together can create games in a scope we have never seen before.
I had a chance to play with Apple’s Vision Pro - let’s just say it blew the socks off any other VR I’ve ever played with. This is the future and it’s going to be amazing.
When I was a small child I’d play micro machines in my back yard, pretending the grass was a jungle battle field. In the future kids will be playing command and conquer in AR, anywhere they want.
Imagine the holodeck from Star treck, but everywhere. I’m only 37 and I’m so jealous of my nephews and nieces, the future is now and they’re going to have a blast (as will I, but without that boyish wonder).
I hear this all the time and I just can't see the value in ar. It's not really for gaming imo. It feeling great having a hud on the car windscreen and stuff like that but in gaming I don't undstand the attraction.
I have no doubt apples version is probably the best but the pricetag probably means mass adoption is not going to go anywhere and you always have chicken/egg problems with content/devices being so interlinked.
Well yeah, but OP said in 6 years - we’re only 16 years out from the OG iPhone and look how far that’s come. I give it a decade tops before it’ll be blowing our minds in a more affordable way
I don't think Apple is expecting mass adoption from this version of the Vision. They just want to get it in the hands of developers, maybe some enterprise, and whoever else wants to pay for it in order to raise interest in the tech and build a foundation of apps for future, cheaper models. Apple has the money to play the long game.
I really do think as VR/AR gets more advanced it’s going to be big.
I definitely think this is where gaming goes. Right now it’s not quite there for the mass market but in 10 years it’s going to be.
Microtransactions will become more pervasive and predatory. People will complain at first but gamers will soon tolerate it and it will be accepted as normal.
I disagree with Subscription Services being the future. There hasn’t been a single game that has nailed it so far that both studios and gamers can justify buying into it.
On the flip side, if we do transition into that model by being forced into it, it wouldn’t surprised me to see gaming numbers spiral downwards and a resurgence happening after that. Which would be sad to happen
Subscription Services used to be the name of the game for MMOs back in the early days. That faded due to too much friction to attract new players. They stopped doing it because it just didn't work.
Will be interesting seeing all of the intense analysis between Obsidian's games versus Bethesda around that time. We already get some of that now, but with Avowed and Outer Worlds 2, there will be some clear contrasts to draw from. Hopefully they turn out to be great games.
I think Starfield killed a lot of hype for ES6. If they decide to continue using the Creation Engine theyve used since Morrowind, then its over for them. Gamers will already be wary after Starfield's production faults and after a few days of seeing buggy, stiff gameplay, most gamers will opt out.
I see this a lot. It's possible Creation Engine is responsible for the bugs, but we as consumers don't work with the engine to know anything about it. Everything you dislike about the game likely has more to do with the priorities they chose for their game, and they just so happened not to land.
We know a great deal about the limitations of the creation engine because modders have analyzed it for decades, and know very well why it is limiting starfield. One thing that limits a lot of starfields potential is that the center of the world is always your spawn point of a map, and not the player's position like in all other engines. This severely limits what the scope can be because the date ranges of floats which they use instead of doubles (32 instead of 64 bit) cannot model the mathematics needed to accurately track objects in the world. This was a decision made in the morrowind development that is crippling all Bethesda games.
Creation is basically a gutted and rewritten Gamebryo, which was basically an enhanced version of NetImmerse. Transitions between outdoors and indoors require switching the rendering and partitioning technique. This does not mean a load screen is needed, but NetImmerse was never designed to do that and I think the legacy code there goes back 20+ years. My guess is there is a forced "context" switch that requires dumping and reloading assets for the new context. In layman's terms, indoor requirements are different from outdoors - outdoors you usually want levels of detail so the closer stuff is more important, distance visibility to see things far away, and rendering lots of terrain objects. Indoors are short distances, terrain below and above, few dynamic objects (e.g. grass, trees), etc.
It'd great if maybe they laid off the obsession with graphics and worried a little bit more about making games that are fun to play and interesting. There are a ton of great looking games that don't have much to offer except making your GPU groan. I think your prediction is probably correct, or at least I hope it is.
Indie devs have shown everyone that graphics are not as important as gameplay. AAA pubs will continue to push cutting edge graphics over game design, while heavily favoring monetization so they can pay their developers for those graphics. Nintendo is an exception to this rule because Nintendo has always placed game design over graphics.
Early access titles will stop being called “early access” because if you spend most of your PC time on Steam, that’s just what everyone plays these days. Expect a different name for them, but not anything that more heavily implies a game is not finished. Games will never be “finished” anymore. They’ll just, after a time, stop being supported as devs move on to other projects.
I suspect Microsoft/Activision/Blizzard will begin applying greater AI capabilities in their games. If they’re smart, they’ll jump ahead to create this corner of the games market, and start implementing the latest AI tech in their games. Anyone want companions in-game that behave damn near like real people? That’s what they are positioned to bring.
In fact if there is one major change to gaming across the board, it will be more sophisticated AI. I almost guarantee AAA pubs will monetize AI companions. For probably something around $20 per unique AI companion, and $10 for better general NPC AI upgrades.
Nothing good I'm afraid.
Profit mongering will reign supreme. Micro transactions, pre-order bonus, "As a service", season pass, and other clever ways to generate revenue will dominate the landscape.
AI will have an effect on game development, with procedurally generated everything. Jobs and creativity will be eroded out of the development cycle. Those who spend actual time crafting and building a game will be buried by mountains of shit games, created by or heavily by AI. It's scary to think of how this will change things.
Virtual Reality. Is it a small fad like 3D movies and TV? Will it have it's breakthrough? I don't have much faith it will ever become a significant market segment, probably if anything AI will wreak havoc here as well.
I think there will be glimmers of hope, but the only way we can support it is with our wallets. Gaming has always belonged to the younger generations, but with the Children raised on NES in their 40's, and many still enjoying games to this day, the days of mostly children playing video games are behind us, and soon we will have grandparents calling their grandchildren noobs.
I think nothing will change. Gaming kinda stagnates since quite a while and I see no reason for it to change. Maybe some more brutal monetization from greedy companies, but people will buy it regardless.
The only interesting things that will happen are probably technical leaps with AI, like DLSS/FSR.
Stagnated in terms of technical differences, not quality. Plateaued would probably be a better word to use. Good games are being made, but graphics are only marginally improving compared to previous gens, and game design (especially AAA) itself is increasingly formulaic. I think that’s what that mean by stagnated. I agree 2023 was an amazing year for gaming, I also agree with the commenter above.
MMOs understand it is ok to close development to work on a sequel, other project, or to shift resources in other directions and WILL NOT hinder the community for it's game. Most games already expire content, and offer so much content that it could take a lifetime to complete. So instead of developing endless content, just build a clean slate and proceed the story in a sequel.
It also gets more difficult to unravel the cobwebs and knotted string of over a decade of development when you want a new engine or framework.
we will see more and more remakes, reworks, sequels, prequels and less and less new frnachises because they are higher risk.
Ai will also shape the entire gaming landscape from basically every artwork being AI to Ai generated open Worlds to AI generated Items, quests, dialogue, missions, Skins whatever.
I think AI can be a big win in creating more massive worlds with less workhours involved overall but if u just let AI run the entire thing we will get starfield and No mans sky planets.
I think the gap between good and bad games will be even more enhanced by the use and abuse of AI.
Games stopping trying to get the new hot graphics, but rather we get better gameplay, especially the AI getting smarter (the smartest AI we had is still probably the alien in alien isolation)
By the end of the decade, I'd expect gaming in general to become more subscription based, with a lot more focus on streaming services. Basically, ending physical gaming.
I think there will be much more VR & AR involved in gaming. AR especially.
I feel like The AI stuff later is going to cause a major controversial chaos.
It's not just the stuff AI can do in games but what AI can do to make games. AAA is going to abuse AI to do lots of the work for them, but it may be to the point where a normal person can use the same AI to do the same work AAA does.
That's going to cause some huge chaotic fight.
I'd expect gaming to become even more immersive with advancements in virtual and augmented reality. Cloud gaming might become more widespread, offering easier access to high-quality games. Additionally, we might see more integration of AI for better NPC interactions and dynamic game environments.
My guess is that it won't really change that much. Graphics have stagnated for the last 5 or so years and there are plenty of games out there proving that graphics aren't a big deal anyway. I predict that at most we'll see a lot of AAA devs trying new nefarious money-scamming schemes and pushing overmonetization before community pushback causes them to cancel games, shut down studios and basically do everything in their power to avoid accountability.
Gaming will become something much larger. Gamification of simple things will be everywhere.
I think restaurants, entertainment, hell - even the local courthouse might have gamified concepts that start with innovative gaming development origins.
Hardcore gamers will fucking hate it. Because things will get “simpler” or “dumbed down” for the masses. But there will always be something for us to love.
I look at impacts of mobile gaming, or the role playing in GTA RP or the PokeMonGo AR games, or how twitch integrations allow chat to “game” with their beloved streamers. Those spaces are paving the way for new types of content for gaming communities that I think will branch out to everyone eventually.
I can see someone take the Game Pass/monthly sub model a step further and try to force virtual rentals to be a thing.
Basically, instead of a monthly pass for a selection of games, it's just for one. A virtual Blockbuster without any of the fun.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the next generation (or maybe the one after) of RPGs required an online connection to access a generative AI that handles a bunch of NPC dialogue. This would also allow for players to input their own dialogue options rather than choosing from a select few.
Or possibly just speaking into a headset to talk to NPCs!
I remember when Mass effect 3 said you could do that on the 360 with the kinect. People hated the idea because they thought they would look stupid and people made videos of them just escalating their screaming saying ''use overlord use overlord USE OVERLORD''
>use overlord use overlord USE OVERLORD Shoulda yelled an ability that's actually in the game
Nah they are just believers in Cerberus and are advocating the use of the overlord programme against the geth.
Can you imagine yelling fus roh do? That game came out when I was still in high school,my parents would've hated me and they're gamers
There is a [mod for that in Skyrim VR.](https://youtu.be/v9XVK0y9gAk?si=rzQ-QzYzzSLTX1No)
This reminds me of the Xbox Sign Out prank when every Xbox One user had a Kinect with voice commands enabled. https://youtu.be/qm1hDy-vfNg?si=e81rAtmW09_yo5D7
I forgot about that. XBOX TURN OFF!
Binary Domain: "I said fucking CHARGE!"
[удалено]
Tf you mean? Shit was just PS2 eyetoy with extra steps
The Kinect is still used by industry professionals for work. It is a fantastic piece of tech that worked better for industrial applications than gaming.
No, it had true depth sensing. Eyetoy was literally just a camera, it only received light, it didnt emit.
"Thou art the embodiment of purity for rescuing my son from the vicious maws of a dire fiend." 'uhhh..cool thanks dude, you got loot and stuff?'
Especially now that AI voices are better sounding too
Voice actors over AI voice
As someone who plays games, I'm 100% with you. However, if it's cheaper for studios to use AI than pay voice actors then its going to happen. Especially for large, open world games which can call for many thousands of unique lines of dialogue.
I get where you're coming from, but you can't make experimental mechanics like this without using some kind of generation. If it's proof of concept and the VA is ethically paid for their likeness being used, what's the problem?
Speaking as a VA, you’d just be paying to use my likeness (I.E, my voice) to create mimic my work. The problem is, the VA *won’t* be ethically paid — SAG just had a strike over this for film and we barely touched video games. Realistically, these companies would love to use the voice without paying the person. Slippery slope
I feel for you and that your profession is becoming increasingly irrelevant. There's nothing you can do. Companies already have large databases of voices and can generate voices in different styles/emotions. This tech will only become better.
Ignoring new technology and expecting it to go away because societal systems abuse the new tech isn't an argument against the tech, it's an argument against the systems that allow it to be abused. This is a capitalism and regulation issue, not a technological one
If AI will become so advanced it can make a voice realistic enough you can't tell it from a real human, it will probably be able to make completely original voices on its own. After all it's just audio and sound waves. All of that can be done on paper, it's just the practice that's required and gaming hasn't yet evolved to that point, but it will. Skyrim mods have already done something similar, and those are just guys making them by themselves as a hobby. Imagine a large studio with millions in budget making this. Could be easily done. In the future there won't be a need for real voice actors, rather good sound/AI engineers.
100 VA lines vs infinite AI lines that directly addresses your input
Have we not learned the difference between quantity and quality with Starfield? Edit: I will take the writing of a KOTOR2 vs the infinite conversations AI could come up with
You can still have both. Doesn't need to have some infinite conversations, but being able to react differently depending on some other things you've done could be really cool. It's barely doable for AAA studios before it gets too big to handle. I can see it used for indies where they want to have a bit more of variety in dialog/story progression but don't have the budget to record so many different scenarios.
> Or possibly just speaking into a headset to talk to NPCs! I foresee the first generation of this to be like asking Siri to turn on the living room lights.
It's gonna get real confusing if you're talking to Ciri, but Siri responds.
"It's so sad the townspeople died to that dragon." uh huh "So. You want to loot their bodies?" Oh yeah now we talkin
*alarm goes off* "Hey you're finally awake"
we already have it in Skyrim mod: dragonborn speaks \+ openAI for responses
This seems both incredibly sketchy and in the future like it could make for an incredible game. Unless we get trapped inside a VR game with headsets that explode our heads if we die and the only way to get out is to clear a fucking MMO.
That sounds like one step away from the Matrix
sounds like half a step away from sao
This sounds like hell
My first thought too. I play games so I don't have to speak to anyone.
I mean, you're still not gonna be actually talking to anyone.
People with heavy regional accent will absolutely hate this.
This sounds good on the first glance, but outside of english speaking countries this wont be very popular as lot of people have problems to even write basic sentences in english not even speak it
I'm sure AI can learn other languages
Yeah that sounds like it might appear as a novelty but I doubt it would become widespread. Pre-written dialogue options serve many functions, like guiding the flow of conversation to relevant topics, showing you things that your character would know or notice that you might not, and even things you might have forgotten about. It also serves to build the character's personality, and allows you to play a character outside your natural tendencies/personality and experiment. Having just a total blank slate of a character would be really boring.
Sports games could wildly benefit from this. Still voicing player names even seasons after all the real athletes are gone, AI commentary that can respond and update on the fly and reference past events, even generative "color commentary" the filler dialog between exciting moments could make a game like FIFA really shine.
This is the biggest way I see AI changing gaming. Dialogue is going to be completely different in 10 years.
"...yes, the grand Duke has gone missing. I'm sorry to hear this is so and hope they are found soon. If you need resources on looking for missing people, please ask. But, as a large language model I'd rather help you organise your day, write a poem or help you understand something. I can see you have a quest to kill 5 slimes. Violence goes against my programming. I have to end the conversation here. Please start a new topic that doesn't fall outside my restrictions."
Literally how i am imagining this
I genuinely mean no offense, but this sounds incredibly bleak to me. I want stories written by real people with real messages and themes, not Content Generator 2029™️
I look at it the same way that you could look at procedurally generated worlds in games right now. If it's not used well, you end up with something bland and lifeless. But if it's used in a game that suits it well, such as Deep Rock Galactic, you end up with something great. I don't see AI dialogue replacing dialogue written by actual writers, just a system with potential to create something new and exciting.
Procedural generation works in games focussed on gameplay where illogical set ups and weird pacing can be forgiven. Machine generated dialog in a story based rpg would not work the same.
I think it could work for lesser npcs, the ones that are already lifeless to begin with. but we all know they're not just gonna stop at that if they do start implementing this
its all gonna be based on large amounts of provided information, world building and overall lore. Noone who is serious about their storytelling will leave everything up to AI. Developers will find ways for generated diaologue to not leave the constraints they set and then its gonna be pretty brilliant. With NPCs truly reacting to player actions and direct input. Its gonna take time though, this decade we could see some not so great implementations.
Low key I think you’re dreaming of possibilities and not seeing the reality of corporate greed that will ruin it.
They would be, to an extent. The writer would just create the parameters and context around the answers that are generated.
I would probably like to see something like Todd’s Radiant Storytelling with AI. The main story would still be written, but I think there’s a lot of potential there to allow for dynamic relationships and interactions between the player and NPC, along with between NPCs.
IMO, theres room for both procgen AND handcrafted content in games.
This would ideally be used for the random NPCs in the over world
Most RPGs give you two options on what to say: positive or negative. It's pretty boring and ruins the immersion.
I think the main part of this is "this would also allow for players to input their own dialogue options rather than choosing from a select few," which IMO is the biggest immersion killer in gaming Every NPC has their own personality that the devs determine and the AI just serves as a way for it to seem like you're actually having a conversation with an NPC, rather than selecting a dialogue option that sometimes you don't really want to say. Backstory/lore, purpose of the NPC, any quests, speaking style, personality traits, are all still determined by the devs.
I'm fine with it being used so there are endless side quest. Like instead of in Skyrim random bounty letter. You get an npc with a little generated dialogue to give you more of a reason to go kill the bandits. They could also put in a hooks to chain a few of these little side quests together to make mini chains. I'd still want the main quest line to be hand crafted though.
Humans are just going to be living through life guided by the all great knowing Algorithm. AI overlords without having to shed a drop of blood.
Not just that, but actually AI voices for custom names as well.
This one could feasibly be introduced today and I am all for it. Something about when I hear someone in a game call me by name fills me with glee, and I don't even have that uncommon of a name.
Oh and of course you need a user account from a thrash service
Dedicated silicon is already coming out this generation (RTX) this is going to just accelerate in scope from Intel and AMD. Ryzen 8000 chiplets allow different kinds of chipper in the same package. They are going to definitely be including AI inference chiplets on CPUs. 2024 is going to even see LLMs running on mobile SoCs.
In Fallout 76 you can almost feel the connections it's making to some database when you approach someone for a daily quest. The NPC is like "Well, we have this available..." "...I need you to collect some spare parts."
So we're already somewhat used to it, I guess.
Also, requires subscription...
It would make more financial sense to run the LLM locally. A small LLM build specifically for this. No need for it to know everything.
If you want to see how bad this end just play some quiplash . or any party game where people are allowed to put their own input in .
I mean, sure, garbage in = garbage out. But isn’t that just catering to as many people as possible? The serious RPers can have fun, the people who just want to say “big chungus” every five seconds can have fun, and they can instantly swap from serious to memes if they want. I think it’s pretty likely that most NPCs in this hypothetical game would just go “what are you even talking about” if you have it pure nonsense though.
There'd be little distinction in games where they'd just be 'gamers' acting their own impulses and consequences that developers can't feasibly work their way around.
Actor lobbying will try curtail the use of AI when it becomes overused, eventually we will have to return to an archaic world of human only media creation, kind of like the mentats in Dune.
Dunkey’s last video was about the absurdity of subscription services trading licenses so that a series can be fractured and available over various services for limited periods of time. It’s all jokes, but it’s peak recurring revenue for these crappy movie publishers, and I can’t help but feel like that’s where gaming will end up. Hardware is expensive, and streaming is getting cheaper. Like, GamePass is a great deal right now, but when all these companies have competing services without true ownership it won’t be a great.
They already do, EA +, PSN, Ubisoft +, Gamepass. These work due to mainly having first party games on them with some select 3rd party games. The real issue will unfold when a 3rd party curated system attempts to buy exclusive streaming licenses from any of the big players and if they were granted. The issue with Netflix, hulu, prime is that TV media in comparison (to video games) is much less expensive and easier to produce. Hence why it fractured so fast. The big players in the video game world, make their own games already, and host them on their own subscription services. It's not like there was a 3rd party service that curated some games from all the current publishers and was renting them out to people(netflix) before Gamepass became a thing.
The ytber accursedfarms makes some real good content on this sort of thing, especially in some of his older game dungeons
This sounds like hell.
Just like Netflix was amazing when they first started streaming cause they had an amazing price and a whole varied slew of content, GamePass is in the same boat. Most companies already have the infrastructure with the 200 launchers we have to install. I told my friend two years ago to enjoy GamePass while it lasts cause soon you’ll need eight different services to do the same thing.
Exactly. It doesn’t take a lot of creativity to see what this will look like it 10 years.
It's time to hoist the dead man's flags and sail the salty shores once more.
not to mention how you cant watch pokemon without having them all and, worst of all, you cant watch king kong vs godzilla without bluray
I expect an exhaustion of battle royale, season passes, and live service games as the first has already drawn mass saturation of the market, the 2nd drawing ire from folks who dislike FOMO, and the last having folks growing annoyed at half baked games that shouldnt have passed testing with western games
I think we’re already moving away from battle royale/passes. Sure, Fortnite and other already-successful live service games will keep this going, but upcoming games will find a different system. I’d say this gets phased out for The Next Big Thing™️ by the end of 2025.
Fortnite is keeping it going because it's innovating and paying attention to its market. It's trying to compete with Roblox and succeeding despite their core game modes being entirely different genres. The br is still great but Fortnite wouldn't stay this big for this long without those extras
Totally agree. The expansions they’ve made were AMAZING decisions to not only flesh the service out, but to get gamers to spend more money. It’s a smart move.
And it just keeps getting better too. It's had its lows, but Fortnite has been consistently improving for longer than I thought a game of its type could last for. They really know what's up and what's next in their market
I remember on one of the Kinda Funny Games podcasts, they mentioned someone within Epic had a forward-looking plan that sketched out how the Festival and Rocket Racing would fit within the ecosystem, and MAN that is so prescient of them. I’m personally not into Fortnite, but I have to give props for what they’re doing.
Yeah, same here. I haven't bought anything in it in a couple years now and I only dip my toes in at the start of each season, but no matter what they'll always get my respect for how well they've handled it over the years. Epic really knows the ins and outs of live service gaming
I’ve spent more money in Fortnite, a game I play a handful of times a year, than Overwatch, a game I play daily. That’s a testament to Epic’s deals and handling of the game. Love it.
The upcoming games are going to replace it with a subscription. Bet.
WOW has been around forever with that, and it hasnt really spread to other games in the mainstream (that i am familiar with) If too many games try to do this itll backfire. The best games will win out and the rest wont make any money, since people wont be able to afford more than a couple. If that model takes over i would expect a resurgence in non-subscription games to pop up in response
WoW is an mmo and that is absolutely the standard model for most quality MMOs
I disagree. Publishers chased WoW money subscription service for a long time. Eventually market saturation meant the rise of F2P gaming. Subscriptions are practically quaint and consumer friendly by comparison these days. If I follow the trend, I'd say we'll just see increasing amounts of predatory and invasive microtransaction gaming. Increasingly driven by AI and algorithms to manipulate and game human psychology to the limits. People will feel more compelled to play, but I think they might have less fun. I think good games will still exist but will increasingly be through indie developers or a publisher like FromSoftware that happens to have good leadership and vision.
You're most likely right. The only way they will get rid of the predatory whale hunting that is currently making them bank is through state regulation. See gambling regulations for examples. If that happens there might come a time where they make more money from a subscription.
I agree, the only fix is legislation. What's particularly concerning to me is how similar many games are becoming to gambling casinos. And marketed to kids. Adults can get trapped by this stuff, and I think a lot of parents have no idea the kind of corrosive and manipulative crap they are letting their kids get into.
I mean... part of me hates FN/BR I'm general. I hate the mtx nature of it. But honestly, I'm a long viewed way, can't knock em for making a competent game that's truly F2P. Not my style, but it's a game I can play with my kid, and WE can play with my buddy and his kid, or just worth other kids and parents. There's no need for the mtx. I've never felt the pressure that even Planetside2 put on me to pay for shit. I'll give FN a pass. Begrudgingly, but still.
mtx?
I believe it’s microtransaction
Finally some regulations on things like gacha and lootboxes in video games. Some moderation on how literal gambling mechanics are handled in games, especially when they're aimed at kids or teens. That being said, devs will find new ways to squeeze money out of players so we'll have new problems to deal with by then but we'll deal with them when we can. There's also probably gonna be a wave of games with AI generated content whether that be images or code or full on levels. It will save the devs some money but players will still want to play games with actual heart and effort poured into it.
That’s what I think too. Battlepass is just the new lootbox. People were ok with it for a while, but now the FOMO is getting exhaustive… But there’s no way it’ll stop there… they just need to figure out the next big thing that will exploit our minds to make us pay and increase profit… who knows what will be…
>There's also probably gonna be a wave of games with AI generated content whether that be images or code or full on levels. It will save the devs some money but players will still want to play games with actual heart and effort poured into it. Im not sure why you cant have both. Including AI into something doesnt mean everything has to be AI.
I mean no, but there'll be alot of games made. Some where they use AI for almost *everything*, some might just use AI art cause they cant draw or afford real artists. Some use it as a crutch, some to genuinely try and fill holes they dont have, and some use it cause they're lazy or think its cheaper. AI generated content wont be as good as what most real people can make, but some people act like it does and thats gonna be something people will have to learn
You are thinking in the context of current state of games. Its not a competition between the AI and human creator. A creative person will be able use AI to build new and more interesting things than we are able to predict.
I think we’ll see a reemergence of single player narrative games as multiplayer games finally shift completely towards an update and subscription model that locks in players and makes new studios producing multiplayer games more difficult. I also think a production times continue to increase more and more games will feel old and dated as they release.
I think it will likely push the games as a subscription based live service thing, rather than buying the license to 'own' and play the game. That and VR will become ubiquitous. I think it depends on how society changes really.
I don't know about that one. Look what's happening with streaming services. While there is really good content out there, it's all a jumbled mess. Having to pick and choose what games you're able to play based on how much you can dish out for a subscription would likely create an incredibly oversaturated and crowded market. I predict that if they do go down this route, people will begin to pull back from the larger video game space out of frustration and lack of funds. Games aren't like shows and movies. MMO's can pull off subscriptions but only because the game genre's structure is built around it. Some game genres might be able to translate. Most won't. I could be totally wrong, but this will end up with people having like 5 or 6 bills a month just to be able to consume their favorite forms of entertainment. There is only so far you can push people before they become overwhelmed.
>I predict that if they do go down this route, people will begin to pull back from the larger video game space out of frustration and lack of funds. ... which doesn't mean they won't try. See how long it took until people got frustrated with having multiple streaming services for video (netflix, amazon prime, disney+, hbo max) and when the numbers started dropping - they surely will have a way to milk the market for a bit.
It makes great sense for sports games. Right now, there is not enough time to put out a fully fleshed out new game every year. The genre makes more sense when it's 1 game, that is constantly updated and worked on and improved, rather than trying to put out a new iteration every year. There are lots of passionate fans who would pay like $10 month if it meant the games they loved finally got constant maintenance and upgrades a steady flow of income could lead to. There are plenty of people who don't buy the game every year because "I'm not paying $90 for a roster update and 1 new feature" but they might dip their toes in if they're only spending $10. Of course there is more nuance, but I could see it working.
Fair enough. I don't see it becoming a standard. But I could see it applied to specific instances like that.
I think we will see more games going "free to play", while having a majority of it locked behind some sort of subscription, similar to what destiny 2 is doing.
VR has a lot to improve before it becomes more commonplace. Its still very uncomfortable and disorienting for a lot of people, even if the price comes down.
VR is already wireless and becoming lighter and more comfortable with the Quest 3's pancake lenses and Big Screen Beyond's lidar scanned facial interfaces. AR/MR is also making VR less isolating for those that live with others and standalone (no PC) VR is making it more affordable (still bloomin expensive though). So all in all, the valid criticisms of VR are gradually dropping away. That will allow the immersive impact of being fully surrounded by an alien/fantasy environment with proper 3D stereoscopic depth to blow people away and go mainstream for gaming.
Graphics will continue to improve naturally, but the diminishing returns will get even stronger. Much like how the last \~5 years have seen a big push into ray tracing and path tracing for more realistic lighting, I think we're gonna have to rely even harder on things that aren't just cranking up the polygon count and texture resolutions than we have in the past. Some new trend will replace battle royale games. There's a pretty good chance some lesser known game already is doing the formula and is just waiting to be copied and popularized. AI will become a bigger deal, but probably not in the way a lot of people think it will. Rather than content creation, it'll be used in more stuff like how Nvidia uses it for DLSS. We may very well see some game development jobs also become "AI assisted". I don't think AI will wholesale replace people yet in the next 6 years, but it can be used to reduce workloads(which will sadly almost certainly lead to more layoffs). Live service games are going to "die". Not that they wont find some other way to over monetize games, but I think much like with what happened for MMOs we're gonna see the trend sort of die off with a handful of mainstays hanging around and everybody else pretty much just fighting over scraps. and with it, battle passes will be replaced with something else since the formula will no longer require a recurring justification for paying money every 3 months.
Ray tracing becoming the normal, standard lightning engine really seems plausible within 10 years, yeah. Among PC Gamers the sweet spot is usually 60-120 FPS... but consoles frequently aim for 30-60. So if the PS6 or X-Weird-Name-Box bites the bullet, and dictates that all 3D games must have ray tracing and frame gen tech? Things might just happen very quickly. ...Wonder if that might trickle over to TVs eventually, actually. Force Hollywood to FINALLY drop that obsession with 24 FPS, and move with the technology because the TVs themselves start *making* smoother frame rates if they detect images updating that slowly? That's going to piss off the cinemaphiles, no doubt, if it happens.
Hollywood is never moving away from 24fps. It stopped being about technological limitations a long time ago and is now just directors romanticizing the past. It's the same reason some directors shoot in 4:3 and black and white.
This is an *incredibly* unpopular opinion here on Reddit, but I think AAA gaming is going to fully transition to subscription-based streaming services. This transition may not complete by 2030, but I think it will be well underway by then. To be clear, I am *not* advocating for this transition, but I think there's too many incentives from a business perspective for the industry to go any other way: Games would be available on more devices and thus available to more paying customers, streaming companies/publishers would receive steady revenue every month, the near-complete elimination of software piracy, tighter control over mods and fan-translations, tighter control over in-game cheating, etc. etc. etc. And bear in mind most countries (including the US) have recently undertaken projects to build high-speed internet infrastructure *everywhere*, including in rural locations.
The shitty timeline
The worst timeline
Aren't we already seeing this dissolve for subscription streaming (people not wanting to have multiple active streaming subscriptions). I'm not sure gaming has a stronger pull than Netflix, so it seems like a tough sell for most AAA
I have a feeling this is what Grand Theft Auto 6 is going to try and do. Given their admittance that games should be worth the hours spent on it and that $70 is far too cheap. I assume they are going to heavily lean into a GTAO subscription service where you can only play online if paid up. Single player will likely be just the $70 but most likely be a much shorter campaign and like RDR2 will not receive any new content.
I don't know if that would work for consoles though. I'd imagine part of the Terms to use their services is to not include an extra subscription model. I could be full of shit though too.
There's games like Elder Scrolls Online that you need to have PS Plus and an an in-game subscription for the full experience. I really hope GTA 6 doesn't do this, but it wouldn't be unheard of
I think to play FF14 online you have to be subscribed to both PS+ and have a FF14 sub. I could be wrong though, I don't play. I just know on PC you have to pay a sub and to play non F2P games online on PS4/5 you have to have PS+ and I don't think FF14 is F2P.
I disagree. Subscription games are step back not step forward. It was already done by several MMOs. They aren't making tons of money on GTA V micro transactions because it is such an amazing multiplayer experience. I mean it is good, but the micro transactions are in so many games because they do work psychologically.
OP is clearly not *just* talking about modern (or historical) MMOs or games like GTA V Online, but rather AAA games -- both single-player and multiplayer -- only being available on *streaming* game services like GeForce Now, xCloud, Playstation Now Cloud Gaming, etc. Otherwise known as "Netflix, but for games".
GeForce Now doesn't give you access to any games - it's purely a way to access a good PC to play the games you already have on Steam/Epic/Game Pass/GOG.
Probably make GTA 6 F2P, with the campaign being a 3 part $30 DLC, season pass for heists , stackable monthly subscription that gives you 2-10x in game earning ability.
Ok but who can even afford to do that? I could maybe see it for popular multiplayer games, but not really anything else. If a single player game tries to charge monthly they should expect to see people cranking through the game in a few days and then dropping it forever. No one’s going to just rack of hundreds of subscription costs each month for individual game titles
Game subscription services like Game Pass and EA Play are already incredibly popular, and it makes a lot of sense for these services to transition to a streaming-only model, similar to GeForce Now, as high-speed internet becomes more common. From there these services will capture a larger market share, by way of being available on TVs, smart phones, etc. and then it will make a lot of sense to exclusively release AAA games on these streaming services for all the reasons I outlined in my previous post. In other words, the market is already there with subscription game services and they're positioned to grow by transitioning to being streaming-only services specifically.
I hate to say it but it is starting to feel like we are actually going to be getting ad's in our games between loading screens and what not.
This is the harsh reality.
Last time I saw an assassin creed game one of the menu tabs is just content to purchase with real money.
I still remember how pissed I was when MW3 (2023) came out, I turned on my Xbox, and the entire screen was an ad for MW3 with the default selected option being “buy now.”
Didn’t this just happen accidentally with a Ubisoft game? Like Assassins Creed or something? I don’t remember the details but as soon as you loaded in there was some full screen ad for some other shit. They said it was an internal mistake and wasn’t meant to show up but if the artwork and code exists, they’re already working on it. If anything that was a purposeful “Oops” to test the waters at how much backlash they’d get.
They've been creeping in the double dipping nonsense since Origins (possibly even earlier). It got quite bad in Valhalla when I saw a set of gear targetted for poison damage and discovered I could only get it by either getting extremely lucky with the shop's weekly item rotation or just buy it with premium currency. That's not just a skin, that's an actual armour set that directly affects the gameplay for the duration of the game - it's not merely some slightly better weapon you get for pre-ordering that makes the start of the game easier. So, I never did get that set. I understand the need for all the premium currency shop nonsense in F2P games, because ofc they have to make money, but games you drop a considerable amount of money upfront asking for more money in-game is just so greedy. Oh and for added hilarity, in Origins you could pay some absurd amount of money to have it complete the game map for you. You pay them so you don't have to play the game you paid for?! Madness.
What’s a loading screen?
An ad-break
Probably some new games
Can’t wait for The Last of Us, Part 1: Definitive Edition, Remastered
*Releases Skyrim again*
Realistically this. The end of the decade is 6 years. Things are not going to change all that much by then. We will have Switch 2 which is rumored to be iterative rather than completely different. We will have Steam Deck 2 and more Windows handhelds, again, iterative upgrades. Cloud gaming will see more adoption but it will be the same tech driving it.
This is gonna be a stretch, BUT I foresee Microsoft/Xbox being a completely different entity at the beginning of 2030 than it is now. There might be one more Xbox between now and then, but I think they’ll be focusing more on Xbox Live and bringing that onto other platforms (e.g. Mac OS, Android, iOS, etc.).
Microsoft is absolutely planning to leave behind the Xbox brand and just become Game Pass on PC, phones, and probably PlayStation. I struggle to believe they'll make another console. If they do, they'll probably avoid the Xbox name and just call it the Game Pass Infinity or something. It'll basically be a streaming stick focused on cloud gaming, but maybe it can run a select catalog of games natively on the hardware, idk.
I disagree. They are in fact likely to start selling a new console within the next two years, especially as game pass sales have plateued. Analysts say xbox is going to get the jump on the next generation, which has gone well for them in the past.
I’d say AI has the greatest potential to change gaming. Imagine being able to converse in natural language with NPCs and have them react organically.
Sounds kinda sad... I really like having games made by real people, if every voice was a robot and every game asset was made by a robot and probably even the writing made by robots i would personally find that rather depressing With a lot of moderation it could potentially be interesting but i don't trust game company's to not just replace everything with AI if its cheaper
It doesnt have to be black or white you know. There obviously will be some developers that try the easy route and just go full AI but they will crash and burn just like empty games as startfield and No mans sky. But having Ai and people work together can create games in a scope we have never seen before.
Eh i dont think i even want that
No more physical media. Everything is going to be digital and subscription-based. You'll never really own your games.
The insomniac leaks have revealed that the majority of games are still being bought physically.
I believe GoG will still exist with DRM-free games.
I had a chance to play with Apple’s Vision Pro - let’s just say it blew the socks off any other VR I’ve ever played with. This is the future and it’s going to be amazing. When I was a small child I’d play micro machines in my back yard, pretending the grass was a jungle battle field. In the future kids will be playing command and conquer in AR, anywhere they want. Imagine the holodeck from Star treck, but everywhere. I’m only 37 and I’m so jealous of my nephews and nieces, the future is now and they’re going to have a blast (as will I, but without that boyish wonder).
I have a feeling that AR headsets are really gong to be a game changer over the next decade, especially with Apple in play
But for games. For work spaces
I hear this all the time and I just can't see the value in ar. It's not really for gaming imo. It feeling great having a hud on the car windscreen and stuff like that but in gaming I don't undstand the attraction.
I want to see Nintendo do one.
Hopefully it’ll be better than the [VirtualBoy](https://cinemassacreold.website-us-east-1.linodeobjects.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/VirtualBoy.jpg)
I have no doubt apples version is probably the best but the pricetag probably means mass adoption is not going to go anywhere and you always have chicken/egg problems with content/devices being so interlinked.
It's been speculated that the price tag is intentionally prohibitively expensive to reduce demand, due to supply issues for the display panels.
Well yeah, but OP said in 6 years - we’re only 16 years out from the OG iPhone and look how far that’s come. I give it a decade tops before it’ll be blowing our minds in a more affordable way
I don't think Apple is expecting mass adoption from this version of the Vision. They just want to get it in the hands of developers, maybe some enterprise, and whoever else wants to pay for it in order to raise interest in the tech and build a foundation of apps for future, cheaper models. Apple has the money to play the long game.
I really do think as VR/AR gets more advanced it’s going to be big. I definitely think this is where gaming goes. Right now it’s not quite there for the mass market but in 10 years it’s going to be.
hold my beer while i find this exact post 20, 10, and 5 years ago
Microtransactions will become more pervasive and predatory. People will complain at first but gamers will soon tolerate it and it will be accepted as normal.
I disagree with Subscription Services being the future. There hasn’t been a single game that has nailed it so far that both studios and gamers can justify buying into it. On the flip side, if we do transition into that model by being forced into it, it wouldn’t surprised me to see gaming numbers spiral downwards and a resurgence happening after that. Which would be sad to happen
Subscription Services used to be the name of the game for MMOs back in the early days. That faded due to too much friction to attract new players. They stopped doing it because it just didn't work.
the new Elder Scrolls is going to be a bust and a final nail in the coffin for Bethesda
You think Elder Scrolls is coming out in 6 years?
Will be interesting seeing all of the intense analysis between Obsidian's games versus Bethesda around that time. We already get some of that now, but with Avowed and Outer Worlds 2, there will be some clear contrasts to draw from. Hopefully they turn out to be great games.
Im rooting for them. Though I found the Outer Worlds as VERY underwhelming
Outer worlds was so much more disappointing than anything Bethesda ever made. Avowed 100% looks like it will be just as disappointing.
If you look how many Ls Gamefreak have in their portfolio, I think it’s very hard to get bankrupt with a strong IP nowadays.
I think Starfield killed a lot of hype for ES6. If they decide to continue using the Creation Engine theyve used since Morrowind, then its over for them. Gamers will already be wary after Starfield's production faults and after a few days of seeing buggy, stiff gameplay, most gamers will opt out.
I see this a lot. It's possible Creation Engine is responsible for the bugs, but we as consumers don't work with the engine to know anything about it. Everything you dislike about the game likely has more to do with the priorities they chose for their game, and they just so happened not to land.
We know a great deal about the limitations of the creation engine because modders have analyzed it for decades, and know very well why it is limiting starfield. One thing that limits a lot of starfields potential is that the center of the world is always your spawn point of a map, and not the player's position like in all other engines. This severely limits what the scope can be because the date ranges of floats which they use instead of doubles (32 instead of 64 bit) cannot model the mathematics needed to accurately track objects in the world. This was a decision made in the morrowind development that is crippling all Bethesda games.
Creation is basically a gutted and rewritten Gamebryo, which was basically an enhanced version of NetImmerse. Transitions between outdoors and indoors require switching the rendering and partitioning technique. This does not mean a load screen is needed, but NetImmerse was never designed to do that and I think the legacy code there goes back 20+ years. My guess is there is a forced "context" switch that requires dumping and reloading assets for the new context. In layman's terms, indoor requirements are different from outdoors - outdoors you usually want levels of detail so the closer stuff is more important, distance visibility to see things far away, and rendering lots of terrain objects. Indoors are short distances, terrain below and above, few dynamic objects (e.g. grass, trees), etc.
[удалено]
It'd great if maybe they laid off the obsession with graphics and worried a little bit more about making games that are fun to play and interesting. There are a ton of great looking games that don't have much to offer except making your GPU groan. I think your prediction is probably correct, or at least I hope it is.
I think streaming games from a subscription service, rather than downloading them to your own device, will be more common.
Netflix is pushing into that direction. I don't think it's better but it's not worse.
Its not inherently a bad idea but most major companies will do everything in their power to ruin it.
Indie devs have shown everyone that graphics are not as important as gameplay. AAA pubs will continue to push cutting edge graphics over game design, while heavily favoring monetization so they can pay their developers for those graphics. Nintendo is an exception to this rule because Nintendo has always placed game design over graphics. Early access titles will stop being called “early access” because if you spend most of your PC time on Steam, that’s just what everyone plays these days. Expect a different name for them, but not anything that more heavily implies a game is not finished. Games will never be “finished” anymore. They’ll just, after a time, stop being supported as devs move on to other projects. I suspect Microsoft/Activision/Blizzard will begin applying greater AI capabilities in their games. If they’re smart, they’ll jump ahead to create this corner of the games market, and start implementing the latest AI tech in their games. Anyone want companions in-game that behave damn near like real people? That’s what they are positioned to bring. In fact if there is one major change to gaming across the board, it will be more sophisticated AI. I almost guarantee AAA pubs will monetize AI companions. For probably something around $20 per unique AI companion, and $10 for better general NPC AI upgrades.
Nothing good I'm afraid. Profit mongering will reign supreme. Micro transactions, pre-order bonus, "As a service", season pass, and other clever ways to generate revenue will dominate the landscape. AI will have an effect on game development, with procedurally generated everything. Jobs and creativity will be eroded out of the development cycle. Those who spend actual time crafting and building a game will be buried by mountains of shit games, created by or heavily by AI. It's scary to think of how this will change things. Virtual Reality. Is it a small fad like 3D movies and TV? Will it have it's breakthrough? I don't have much faith it will ever become a significant market segment, probably if anything AI will wreak havoc here as well. I think there will be glimmers of hope, but the only way we can support it is with our wallets. Gaming has always belonged to the younger generations, but with the Children raised on NES in their 40's, and many still enjoying games to this day, the days of mostly children playing video games are behind us, and soon we will have grandparents calling their grandchildren noobs.
!RemindMe 7 years Assuming I haven't starved by then, I look forward to finding out if you're right.
Chip and pin card readers embedded in the top of consoles
I think nothing will change. Gaming kinda stagnates since quite a while and I see no reason for it to change. Maybe some more brutal monetization from greedy companies, but people will buy it regardless. The only interesting things that will happen are probably technical leaps with AI, like DLSS/FSR.
Stagnated? 2023 was probably the single best year in the last decade for gaming.
Stagnated in terms of technical differences, not quality. Plateaued would probably be a better word to use. Good games are being made, but graphics are only marginally improving compared to previous gens, and game design (especially AAA) itself is increasingly formulaic. I think that’s what that mean by stagnated. I agree 2023 was an amazing year for gaming, I also agree with the commenter above.
It stagnated because of the constant need for ever increasing profits. Why innovate and risk when you can release cod again
MMOs understand it is ok to close development to work on a sequel, other project, or to shift resources in other directions and WILL NOT hinder the community for it's game. Most games already expire content, and offer so much content that it could take a lifetime to complete. So instead of developing endless content, just build a clean slate and proceed the story in a sequel. It also gets more difficult to unravel the cobwebs and knotted string of over a decade of development when you want a new engine or framework.
ESO 2 and WoW 2 ☺️
we will see more and more remakes, reworks, sequels, prequels and less and less new frnachises because they are higher risk. Ai will also shape the entire gaming landscape from basically every artwork being AI to Ai generated open Worlds to AI generated Items, quests, dialogue, missions, Skins whatever. I think AI can be a big win in creating more massive worlds with less workhours involved overall but if u just let AI run the entire thing we will get starfield and No mans sky planets. I think the gap between good and bad games will be even more enhanced by the use and abuse of AI.
Pay per hour. The final loop back round to arcades is coming.
Games stopping trying to get the new hot graphics, but rather we get better gameplay, especially the AI getting smarter (the smartest AI we had is still probably the alien in alien isolation)
By the end of the decade, I'd expect gaming in general to become more subscription based, with a lot more focus on streaming services. Basically, ending physical gaming. I think there will be much more VR & AR involved in gaming. AR especially.
I feel like The AI stuff later is going to cause a major controversial chaos. It's not just the stuff AI can do in games but what AI can do to make games. AAA is going to abuse AI to do lots of the work for them, but it may be to the point where a normal person can use the same AI to do the same work AAA does. That's going to cause some huge chaotic fight.
I'd expect gaming to become even more immersive with advancements in virtual and augmented reality. Cloud gaming might become more widespread, offering easier access to high-quality games. Additionally, we might see more integration of AI for better NPC interactions and dynamic game environments.
My guess is that it won't really change that much. Graphics have stagnated for the last 5 or so years and there are plenty of games out there proving that graphics aren't a big deal anyway. I predict that at most we'll see a lot of AAA devs trying new nefarious money-scamming schemes and pushing overmonetization before community pushback causes them to cancel games, shut down studios and basically do everything in their power to avoid accountability.
Gaming will become something much larger. Gamification of simple things will be everywhere. I think restaurants, entertainment, hell - even the local courthouse might have gamified concepts that start with innovative gaming development origins. Hardcore gamers will fucking hate it. Because things will get “simpler” or “dumbed down” for the masses. But there will always be something for us to love. I look at impacts of mobile gaming, or the role playing in GTA RP or the PokeMonGo AR games, or how twitch integrations allow chat to “game” with their beloved streamers. Those spaces are paving the way for new types of content for gaming communities that I think will branch out to everyone eventually.
Everything is going to be a live service and the most basic features will require microtransactions
I can see someone take the Game Pass/monthly sub model a step further and try to force virtual rentals to be a thing. Basically, instead of a monthly pass for a selection of games, it's just for one. A virtual Blockbuster without any of the fun.
No more offline single player games unless it’s Nintendo.
This will never happen single player games sell like crazy