Then why wasn't it a cross-gen game?
Microsoft says reports of open-world zombie game coming to current-gen are false; "It's an Xbox One exclusive, no plans for 360."
www.gamespot.com
Because MS had a partnership deal with Capcom to use it as a vehicle for promoting XBO and thought the best way to do that was by keeping it next-gen exclusive.
You guys are acting like money is never a factor in this. That's crazy.
There was nothinf technically impressive about dead framerate 3 other than the fact that previous dead risings were better, ran better, and we talking about a launch system handling the game poorly, and you think the xone can handle a scaled down series x game...?
Imagine believing all game development is exactly the same....
CamHostage
Believe it or not I gotta truncate myself here
. I'll just touch on the launch-period games you bring up.
PS1: Ridge Racer, Wipeout, Air Combat, Toshinden
Ridge Racer was visually great but nothing in terms of gameplay or physics that wasn't possible on, say, the 3DO which launched two years ago. Not to mention in terms of gameplay it lacked the depth of offerings like Daytona USA (whose Saturn port was rushed out hence the bad graphics and pop-in). Nothing in RR showed a game design shift in something beyond Need For Speed on 3DO. In fact in some ways NFS was more technically impressive in terms of physics.
Battle Arena Toshinden, that game is notorious for being visually flashy but lacked a lot on substance. In terms of gameplay and mechanics, nothing there couldn't of been done on even the 32X, which got Virtua Fighter (which by all accounts of gameplay was the better game). BAT has a somewhat dubious history these days because of that, but the main reason it impressed at the time was due to graphics, not gameplay.
Wipeout, again, it was VISUALLY great but was only a small incremental improvement over games like F-Zero which was a SNES launch title. It might've had an atmosphere only capable on then-next gen hardware, though, so I'm willing to give that one a pass. Still though, it's more the exception, not the rule, and it wasn't what I'd call indicative of a paradigm shift. The same can be said of Ace Combat which, technically, was already an arcade game much like Ridge Racer so that now brings up the question of do you count ports of games from other areas of the industry as contributing to a "paradigm shift" in game design for a home console they did not originate on? Because by that logic we should be giving games like Ridge Racer and Ace Combat to the arcade.
PS2: Tekken Tag, Dynasty Warriors, Kessen, Dark Cloud, AquaAqua, SSX, Smuggler's Run, TimeSplitters, UT
I'm sorry but there was NOTHING that was a game-changer in Tekken Tag. It was a (very prettied up) port of the arcade Tekken Tag which was basically Tekken 3 with tag-team. A fantastic formula, but nothing new. In fact I remember at the time people were more impressed with DOA2, a game that actually did bring some big changes in game design for fighting games due to the destructible stages. Only thing is, it already had an earlier home port on the Dreamcast, and that was the better version to boot. But again, its roots are as an arcade game so shouldn't that scene get the credit?
I think Dark Cloud somewhat qualifies, though it didn't execute on many of its concepts very well. Again, though, that's the exception, not the rule. SSX was just a well-polished iteration of previous snowboarding games, it didn't really reinvent the wheel in game design for that genre (let alone industry at large) per-se. Very fun game, though. Dunno about Smuggler's Run; in a lot of ways it was kind of Rockstar's take on games like Crazy Taxi which I'd say had a much bigger impact on racing game design, and that game originated in arcades. But even before that there was Harley Davidson & L.A Riders, another SEGA arcade release in 1997 that set the foundation for that. Smuggler's Run was just iterating on the formula for those games with its own little spin, nothing genre-shifting especially considering Crazy Taxi got a Dreamcast port beforehand.
Timesplitters is interesting; while it did have some innovations in the concept and multiplayer, it also clearly iterated on N64 shooters like GoldenEye and Perfect Dark. I think it might count, but again it's an exception not a rule, and notice this is a 3rd-party game. Unreal Tournament doesn't count; the PS2 version was cut down and additionally, its roots are with the PC scene. Give them their due on that one.
PS3: R6 Vegas, Oblivion, Untold Legends, Blast Factor (not revolutionary in and of itself, but you couldn't download games with PS2, and now you can)
Vegas was a multiplatform release and already saw release on 360 well before the PS3 version. So if you want to give any system props on that one, it should be the 360. Same goes for Oblivion, it released on 360 first, PS3 just got the port later on. I don't know a lot about Blast Factory so can't comment there.
PS4: Knack, Killzone Shadow Fall
I think both of these fall into the "technical showpiece" category but didn't have much in the way of legitimate gameplay innovations.
PS5:
Basically gave my thoughts here already. Sole exception of Ratchet and Clank, but from the gameplay seen so far seems to serve more as an evolution on the formula and nothing I'd consider a paradigm shift in game design for the platforming genre or gaming as a whole.