Is innovation a selling point for next gen hardware?

To clarify, I mean innovation on the hardware side, as in stuff like the new Kinect and or the idea of trading/sharing your digital library. I'm curious because, in the wake of Microsoft reversing their controversial policies, I have noticed more than a few comments bemoaning both next generation consoles of "lacking innovation", several comments have even went as far as crudely labeling the new consoles as "The PS3-2, and Xbox 360-2."

Am I alone in thinking this is a little ridiculous? While I'm all for innovation in games, I feel like that sentiment presents a really poor criticism. Wasn't this generation of consoles pretty great, as far as the games go at least? Obviously companies like Sony and Microsoft want to capture the attention of a larger audience, but since when are the games not enough for the core audience?

So I suppose what I'm asking is, Do you guys think this sentiment is just typical internet cynicism, or do you believe that this perceived "lack of innovation" is relevant to the average gamer?

I still see a lot of innovation being toted by both companies. To say that the DRM was the only innovative thing about the next gen consoles is ridiculous to me. I think it is just typical internet cynicism. Microsoft is still implementing three OS in their system which offers snap functionality between different forms of media. That to me is innovative and new. It may prove to be just a minor convenience or it could change the way that people consume media but it's still really interesting that they're pushing for that kind of a device. The DRM doesn't seem to have had any impact on that.

Sony is implementing the share button and the ability for someone to take the control of someone else's game through a game stream. That's amazing to me. Also we still haven't seen what Gaikai is doing, they could potentially be removing the need for backwards compatibility in the long run. Also both companies are putting systems in place for people to upload gameplay directly to ustream and twitch.

This doesn't even include what both Microsoft and Sony could do with cloud computing and what that means in 5 years.

The ability to start a game up from the exact point you left off is also something that will be new to gaming this next generation.

If DRM is innovation then what the fuck has been happening on the PC for all these years? I think it would have been damaging if Microsoft had followed through on such a risky plan to innovate in a way that was lopsided to be more business friendly than consumer friendly.

This is going to be a really exciting generation in my opinion.

In my opinion, the Wii U is a prime example of how improved hardware is more important than "innovation". The specs on both the PS4 and the Xbox One (aka "XBONE" aka "Xbox 180" aka "The One") are far more impressive than those of the Wii U. Some of the demos shown at E3 at Microsoft's and Sony's press conferences seem to be far superior to anything that Nintendo has or will put out in terms of graphical fidelity, and those are just the launch (window) titles. While the Wii U has its tablet-like controller that could theoretically be used for very cool purposes, the console can't hope to run the kinds of games people will point to and say "These are next gen games" (developers also aren't using that controller for anything particularly innovative, but that's a separate issue entirely).

It's gotten to the point where some major third party developers have openly said that they have no plans to develop for the Wii U because the console simply isn't powerful enough. This is what actually matters to the typical consumer. Someone who doesn't follow games closely will look at a game like CoD or Madden and say "Look at those graphics" rather than "Why am I paying for the same thing I paid for last year and the year before?" As for a more hardcore gamer (at least from my perspective), I would rather my consoles be more powerful and standardized, then have the GAMES be innovative. To use an (extremely pretentious) analogy, imagine the console as a blank canvas and the game developer as an artist; it is the artist's job to make a fresh piece of art, not the person who makes the canvas. Having more powerful consoles means more possibilities for innovative game design on a grander scale. That's what's more important to me than the console innovation. It's all about innovation in game design, not console design.

So in conclusion: Yes; it is ridiculous to criticize the consoles for not being "innovative".

Sometimes you don't need to change everything. Just ask final cut X. Personally, I was tired of console options meaning choppy framerates and worse visuals. I also constantly felt disappointed with the size and scope of the worlds being created. Deus Ex was an example of a game that could have used a more cohesive, dense open world.

The new hardware and internal hard drives are going to give developers are bigger canvas, and more paint. I'm totally fine with that.

I find it a little ridiculous. I fully expect those new features to be in full swing in a few years.

this

its always bring me back to believing the Internets when people like you make super sensible posts. the internet is super fucking cynical when ready.

I do agree that these new consoles are not mind blowing innovative but that's ok, if we can get consoles that are a little more future proof. I believe many things have changed in how we play games and the ps3 and 360 has had to struggle to keep up considering how far PCs have taken the performance of these games.

If we can get better performance across the broad like better frame rate, minimum loading times, less glitches and bugs, no texture pop in, etc. i would be happy with that. Along with finally getting with the times on digital services. I feel all that stuff is very hard to show off and is not the flashy thing like mind blowing graphics.

My only problem with these claims is believing in false innovative such as supporting DRM, the power of the cloud and having to be online meaning a better online experience. I'm not saying all these things are false but these things are under false contexts to make up a reason to have DRM. Everything Microsoft said they could do that benefits the consumer they could still do but won't and it has nothing to do with having to be online all the time. So i look for true innovation that will change everyone experience for the better, so lets hope Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony realize that and put work in true innovation and not the fast track to making/saving money.

I agree. Even a game as simple as Minecraft can expose the limitations the aging hardware were imposing. Minecraft on the 360 was limited to comparatively tiny worlds, and even those tiny worlds seemed to take forever to pop in. If something as simple as that can see real benefits from the bump in specs, surely your Elder Scrolls, Deus Exes, and Mad Maxes will see meaningful gains as well. Simply raising those limitations will give developers more opportunity to innovate. Of course, many won't innovate, but those developers probably weren't going to innovate regardless of how the hardware was changed. We saw with the Wii that innovative hardware isn't enough to get developers to make innovative games.