NEXT-Gen Consoles

JackSpadesSI

Senior member
Jan 13, 2009
636
0
0
Has anyone heard any news and/or rumors of the release of the NEXT generation of console systems? NOTE: I'm not counting the HD-Wii.

I haven't heard a whisper but it can't be TOO far off, can it? The Xbox came out in 11/2001, followed by the Xbox 360 in 11/2005. The same 4-year pattern would put it at 11/2009 - which *obviously* isn't going to happen. Still, I bet they're well underway with the concept.

So, since I'm bored, I was wondering if there was any speculation on hardware specs, release dates, etc.
 

SneakyStuff

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2004
4,294
0
76
You better believe they are all in the R&D phases but my guess is that they are in the earliest phases. Nintendo is still selling Wii's like there's no tomorrow, the 360 is doing alright, and the PS3 still has more "untapped potential" so there's really no urgency to push a new console out right now. My guess is that Sony or Nintendo will be first out of the gates in the winter of 2011 and that is a complete guess! They're all trying to push the envelope and do something that hasn't been done before.

Edit: I'm thinking that Sony and MS will release their motion controls with the PS3 and 360, refine them, and then incorporate them into their next gen consoles out of the gates.
 

gorcorps

aka Brandon
Jul 18, 2004
30,741
456
126
The last I heard was that this gen of consoles was intended to last a decent amount longer than the last one. I remember hearing 7 years
 

DaveSimmons

Elite Member
Aug 12, 2001
40,730
670
126
xbox 1 died early because Microsoft signed a bad deal with nvidia for the graphics chip, where nvidia was not required to lower the cost over time.

MS has said 2010 will just bring the natal sensor add-on to the existing 360.

Sony launched in Nov 2006 and has finally cost-reduced the PS3 to the point where they can make money on it, so Nov 2011 is the earliest I'd expect a PS4.

Specs?
Sony and MS will probably learn from nintendo and reach for the duct tape. PS4 = PS3 with updated graphics chip, 2-4 times the RAM, an evolved Cell with 1-2 more general purpose cores and a few more SPEs. 360 = also more RAM, more cores, updated graphics. Both will have more waggle fun with natal and eyetoy.
 
Oct 19, 2000
17,860
4
81
I've read the same thing gorcorps has, and that this generation of consoles will last a bit longer than the typical 5 year average. I'm actually fine with that, because I think they have plenty of power to still make great looking games. I personally don't think we'll see anything new until 2011, maybe 2012.
 

tatteredpotato

Diamond Member
Jul 23, 2006
3,934
0
76
The fact of the matter is that launching a console is verrrrrrrrrrrry expensive. Companies lose money on each sale (usually, although may not be the case with Nintendo), and they idea is that this is an investment to build market share which will pay off in the long run by consumers buying games, and more consoles when they can make money on the hardware. Most of the hardware sold now is probably not at a loss, so these consoles are just entering the "profitable phase" so to speak, and you likely won't see them jumping the gun.

The original Xbox had a very short life because of what it was. It's pretty obvious it was thrown together very cheaply and quickly (stock pc parts) to get to market. There was no plan to make any money whatsoever on the original Xbox, but the plan was to simply get the Xbox brand out to the public to set the stage for the 360. Since MS had no intentions of making money on the original Xbox, they didn't have incentive to wait around and lavish in the "profitable phase" of that console cycle, which is why MS sort of pushed ahead in launching the 360.

I don't know about you guys, but I feel this generation is just now getting to maturity, and I don't think they market is ready for new consoles. Once you see PS3s and Xbox 360s selling for $130 or $150 (I'm talking the "Pro" or hard drive equipped packages here) which is more of a mass market price point, then you can start imagining the next generation coming within a year or so.

2012 is the earliest I'd expect to see anything new in consoles, mostly talking Xbox and PS here though.... anything Nintendo would release would really be playing catch-up to this generation imho.
 

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
Last generation a bit over 150Million consoles were sold to the 'core gamer' demographic worldwide. So far this generation we are sitting at ~52Million units sold to that same demographic. Given we have been looking at healthy double digit growth rate percentage wise it isn't unreasonable to expect this market to end up in the 170-200Million range this generation.

This current generation a couple different factors are clouding things up a bit. First off is MS launched rather early, the PS2 lasting an additional 2 years. MS did this for many reasons, the most pressing being their desire to gain an installed base advantage which up until now has paid off rather well for them. Long term this may end up costing them a bit, their media choice was very poor for a high def console, we are already staring down releases covering 4 disks, and we still haven't hit the fourth year of the consoles life cycle. I honestly think that this limitation is going to end up being the biggest factor pushing MS into the next round. Everything else in their system is well suited to last for a considerable amount longer then the last generation.

The Wii is off in its' own little world, it doesn't appeal to 'core gamers' as the other two do and its' target audience is much less interested in superior cinematic gaming experiences, so the technical limitations of their system aren't as much of a drain as the other offerings. That said, Nin could push out a HD version of the Wii, using simply more powerful versions of the Wii hardware to allow for HD gaming and do it rather cheaply. If they will want to pursue this or not, I don't know. But it is well within the realm of reasonable to think they will head somewhere in this general direction. They may look at it as countering the other systems motion control setups that are coming next year.

Sony is in a very different position and one that hasn't been approached before in the console space. They are clearly in last place at the moment, ~8Million units behind MS on a global basis- but in terms of dollars they have easily outsold MS on consoles to date, and are close to Nin. Before the PS3 no console moved 5Million units at $400- the PS3 has moved 22Million at that price point. Why is that a factor? We aren't sure how much a price drop is going to impact their installed base numbers moving forward. Because they are currently operating on a level that hasn't ever existed before- and have done it for so long, it is hard to gauge how much the $299 and then the $199 price point is gong to do for their numbers relative to the competition. Obviously they have a decisive edge in storage medium, and that is their biggest advantage in terms of how long their system can last and remain viable, but the level of sales they reach once they close in on the mass market price point is going to heavily influence not only their plans for the next generation, but also MS's.

When we see the next gen is going to depend on a lot of differing factors IMO. If Nin holds their sales lead for the next couple of years, I wouldn't expect them to do much of anything prior to '13, if they start to slide then I could see them making a move in late '12 barring them crashing like a meteor in the near future(which is extremely unlikely).

For MS and Sony they tie to closely to each other to figure out one without the other. If Sony's price drop fails to increase its' sales rate versus MS(extremely unlikely) then I could see them prepping a new round for '12 at the earliest. If this did happen, I would expect MS to plan to launch at the same time as Sony, feeling confident in how they fared this generation to go toe to toe with Sony on an even launch schedule. If Sony manages to slightly outpace MS's sales rate(which is likely at least, globally the two systems were almost tied prior to the PS3 price drop rumors) and Sony slowly catches up to MS then I wouldn't be shocked to see MS working on hitting a '12 launch window but without Sony. The amount of R&D Sony sunk into the PS3 unless it ends up an absolute failure I see them wanting to hit '13 at least with the PS3 as their halo product. If Sony sees a massive sales spike and they quickly surpass MS on a global basis(very unlikely) then I could see MS moving to quickly get a new system out the door in the '11 timeframe, with Sony likely trying to push until at least '13 before getting a new system out(Sony would be rather arrogant if they managed to easily surpass MS when the prices got close, although this isn't likely to happen).

You could bet safe money that these systems are all in the design phases already, a good deal of where their targets are should be fairly obvious by this time next year(end of next year at the latest). I would expect Nin to stick with comparable designs to their current hardware- it would make it relatively trivial(in very relative terms of course) to hit with a HD Wii in short order. Sony and MS are both likely to follow along their same general design philosophy also, if they both stick with their respective vendors for CPUs and GPUs then they could push an updated system out the door in a relatively short period of time(in terms of from when they nail down final specifications to shipping, the core platform is well into the design phase by now).

So I guess in summation my answer to the OP question would be, it depends ;)
 

tatteredpotato

Diamond Member
Jul 23, 2006
3,934
0
76
Originally posted by: BenSkywalker
...their media choice was very poor for a high def console, we are already staring down releases covering 4 disks, and we still haven't hit the fourth year of the consoles life cycle. I honestly think that this limitation is going to end up being the biggest factor pushing MS into the next round. Everything else in their system is well suited to last for a considerable amount longer then the last generation.

I would argue the problem isn't as big as you make it out to be.... Aside from some of the larger RPG games, the DVD capacity isn't a problem. Couple that with the fact you can now install games to the HDD and I think it's pretty much a moot-point. Including a high-def optical media drive would have delayed the 360 just about a full year (which may not have been quite such a bad idea looking at how the hardware turned out from a quality point of view), and from a business perspective that delay wasn't acceptable.

I have quite a few 360 games (15 ish) and none of they span more than one disc. The HD Media drive would be nice, however I don't think it will be the factor pushing MS into a new generation, and you can put money on this being the reason for the "Install" feature on the new dashboard.
 

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
I would argue the problem isn't as big as you make it out to be.... Aside from some of the larger RPG games, the DVD capacity isn't a problem.

Rage is heading to 2 DVDs

Forza3 is 2 DVDs with half the content of GT5

Doom4 is releasing on 4 DVDs

Those aren't large RPG games by any stretch of the imagination, and this is they type of situation that has always been a larger factor the later in a consoles life cycle you get. As far as the install option- developers(unless they are shipping a MMO) aren't allowed to require it, and even if it was allowed as mandatory a full max install could still require a title to span 4 DVDs versus 1 BRD for the competition. If you take a look into how much MS charges for licensing on multi disk games you'll see where this will become an issue(even if isn't for end users, it will be for publishers and obviously developers).
 

tatteredpotato

Diamond Member
Jul 23, 2006
3,934
0
76
Originally posted by: BenSkywalker
I would argue the problem isn't as big as you make it out to be.... Aside from some of the larger RPG games, the DVD capacity isn't a problem.

Rage is heading to 2 DVDs

Forza3 is 2 DVDs with half the content of GT5

Doom4 is releasing on 4 DVDs

Those aren't large RPG games by any stretch of the imagination, and this is they type of situation that has always been a larger factor the later in a consoles life cycle you get. As far as the install option- developers(unless they are shipping a MMO) aren't allowed to require it, and even if it was allowed as mandatory a full max install could still require a title to span 4 DVDs versus 1 BRD for the competition. If you take a look into how much MS charges for licensing on multi disk games you'll see where this will become an issue(even if isn't for end users, it will be for publishers and obviously developers).

That's the thing... you can still swap discs if you don't install (annoying, yes) however if you have a decent sized hard drive, which MS seems to be pushing up HDD sizes all the time (still not acceptable price per gig yet though admittedly) then just install and you're none the wiser. I'm not familiar with MS license fees, however I'm sure the extra fee is to discourage this situation if it can be avoided.

I guess I can't really comment on whether or not so many discs are "necessary" compared to games like Halo or Gears. For example if Rage's graphics are substantially better/ larger and more expansive levels and environments, or if it's just inefficient programming.

Seeing as Rage and Doom 4 are both on the same engine that could be the problem. Like I said before, I can't really comment on if the extra space is "worth it" or not.

I still don't see it being a driving factor towards a new generation.

 

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
472
126
What's the big deal over having multiple disks??? Have none of you played any games in the Saturn/PS1 era??? It is seriously no big deal at all.
 

ChaoZ

Diamond Member
Apr 5, 2000
8,906
1
0
The current-gen still feels like next-gen to me. I doubt people are ready for new consoles anyway.
 

arod

Diamond Member
Sep 26, 2000
4,236
0
76
Originally posted by: ChaoZ
The current-gen still feels like next-gen to me. I doubt people are ready for new consoles anyway.

Agreed.... I think this generation will be known as the upgradable software gen. Just think about how much stuff has been added to all the consoles (even the wii which is very far behind the others in this respect has added a bunch of new stuff to their console via a software update)

You are now seeing the hardware take this kind of a shift. Motion+/balance board, natal, pseye is the same thing for the hardware.

I do think you will see "new" consoles for the ps3/360 as well. The ps3 slim is all but confirmed at this point and I am pretty certain there will be a new 360 next fall with a bug hard drive and natal.
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Probably not until 2012 due to several factors such as the economy, being able to offer new features via software, new motion controls coming out, etc.
 

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
What's the big deal over having multiple disks??? Have none of you played any games in the Saturn/PS1 era???

Great add line they could use there- The XBox 360 is as good as the PS1! ;)

That's the thing... you can still swap discs if you don't install (annoying, yes) however if you have a decent sized hard drive, which MS seems to be pushing up HDD sizes all the time (still not acceptable price per gig yet though admittedly) then just install and you're none the wiser.

So limit your library, install/uninstall constantly or swap disks, and you are OK with those options? Even if we accept that everyone who owns a 360 is a die hard MS loyalist who will be fine swapping disks around constantly, publishers have to pay significant additional royalites if the game exceeds 2 disks, that is going to be a problem. That it won't be necessary on the other platform is something that will certainly be pushed into people's faces constantly I'm sure.

I guess I can't really comment on whether or not so many discs are "necessary" compared to games like Halo or Gears.

Linear shooters should be fine on DVDs. If that is all the console world had in it, it certainly wouldn't be that big of an issue.

Seeing as Rage and Doom 4 are both on the same engine that could be the problem. Like I said before, I can't really comment on if the extra space is "worth it" or not.

It uses Megatexturing, and it appears to be extremely impressive. Even if you were to ignore those, what about Forza3? They are limited to half the content even using 2 disks, these types of issues are only going to increase in frequency.

For example if Rage's graphics are substantially better/ larger and more expansive levels and environments, or if it's just inefficient programming.

Carmack, inefficient programming....? Heh, the real killer is assets, that is what is going to be taking up so much space. Six DVDs with devs paying an enormous penalty to MS for every game shipped or one BRD with normal royalty payments? Storage is going to be an issue this generation. Either devs will be continually forced to compromise their games for cross platform titles(as id has been with Rage already) and publishers are going to have pay MS considerably more per game sold, or the PS3 is going to end up with content that the 360 can't compete with(GT5 is looking to be the first major example of this). I'm not saying MS made a mistake launching early, but there is little doubt that by doing so they limited the realistic lifespan in relation to the competition on a hardware level.
 

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
472
126
Originally posted by: BenSkywalker
What's the big deal over having multiple disks??? Have none of you played any games in the Saturn/PS1 era???

Great add line they could use there- The XBox 360 is as good as the PS1! ;)

That's the thing... you can still swap discs if you don't install (annoying, yes) however if you have a decent sized hard drive, which MS seems to be pushing up HDD sizes all the time (still not acceptable price per gig yet though admittedly) then just install and you're none the wiser.

So limit your library, install/uninstall constantly or swap disks, and you are OK with those options? Even if we accept that everyone who owns a 360 is a die hard MS loyalist who will be fine swapping disks around constantly, publishers have to pay significant additional royalites if the game exceeds 2 disks, that is going to be a problem. That it won't be necessary on the other platform is something that will certainly be pushed into people's faces constantly I'm sure.

I guess I can't really comment on whether or not so many discs are "necessary" compared to games like Halo or Gears.

Linear shooters should be fine on DVDs. If that is all the console world had in it, it certainly wouldn't be that big of an issue.

Seeing as Rage and Doom 4 are both on the same engine that could be the problem. Like I said before, I can't really comment on if the extra space is "worth it" or not.

It uses Megatexturing, and it appears to be extremely impressive. Even if you were to ignore those, what about Forza3? They are limited to half the content even using 2 disks, these types of issues are only going to increase in frequency.

For example if Rage's graphics are substantially better/ larger and more expansive levels and environments, or if it's just inefficient programming.

Carmack, inefficient programming....? Heh, the real killer is assets, that is what is going to be taking up so much space. Six DVDs with devs paying an enormous penalty to MS for every game shipped or one BRD with normal royalty payments? Storage is going to be an issue this generation. Either devs will be continually forced to compromise their games for cross platform titles(as id has been with Rage already) and publishers are going to have pay MS considerably more per game sold, or the PS3 is going to end up with content that the 360 can't compete with(GT5 is looking to be the first major example of this). I'm not saying MS made a mistake launching early, but there is little doubt that by doing so they limited the realistic lifespan in relation to the competition on a hardware level.

I'm not an MS fanboi and only have a 360 cus it was given to me but I seriously don't understand why you're making such a big deal over swapping disks. Constantly swapping disks??? You would only need to swap disks when necessary like the many other games that have done it. I don't remember people complaining about swapping disks on Metal Gear or Final Fantasy games.
 

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
Originally posted by: Queasy
Probably not until 2012 due to several factors such as the economy, being able to offer new features via software, new motion controls coming out, etc.

This. 2011 or 2012 depending on the economy.
 

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
Let us assume then that swapping disks is a great feature for end users then, they all love it, can't wait to do it(although I very distinctly remember everyone bitching up a storm in the 32bit era asking why the cart users didn't have to swap, wasn't that the point of CDs etc, but I digress).

A)As a content developer, your publisher isn't willing to pay millions of dollars for you to have the content you need to be directly competitive. You reduce content or reduce the quality of your assets.

B)Your publisher is willing to pay the extra royalties to support your game's content- now take the time to figure out how you are going to break down all of your content to fit into a multi disk setting, perhaps being forced to alter your game in its' entirety to make it work(we already have a documented case of this).

These issues are already real and present now, they are going to escalate as we continue to move forward. As a gamer, we would rather see choice B, but in the real world A is a far more likely outcome.
 

Sadaiyappan

Golden Member
Nov 29, 2007
1,120
4
81
I think sony is bankrupted out of putting out a next gen console as per usual time frame. Microsoft finally has gained some ground and is scared to go to next gen. And Nintendo has won this gen but may not win next gen so they want this gen to last as long as possible.
 

fatpat268

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2006
5,853
0
71
I don't see a next gen console for a while. Why? Well, what's going to make it next gen? You'll get a slight increase in visual fidelity, but not a whole lot. Just look at PC games. In the past few years, visuals have stagnated. You have games like crysis with some of the best graphics out there, but games like these were released two years ago. Nothing much has changed since then, neither will it in the near future.

The new Xbox and Playstation , as DaveSimmons said, will be an evolution of the current hardware. It'll have a slightly upgraded processor, a lot more ram, upgraded GPU... all in a fairly small package, I'd imagine. Microsoft will go Bluray with their next console and will probably make Natal its major focus. Playstation will do much of the same thing.
 

destrekor

Lifer
Nov 18, 2005
28,799
359
126
Originally posted by: Sadaiyappan
I think sony is bankrupted out of putting out a next gen console as per usual time frame. Microsoft finally has gained some ground and is scared to go to next gen. And Nintendo has won this gen but may not win next gen so they want this gen to last as long as possible.

In reality, console manufacturers aren't looking to make another console just because. The goal is to compete, and try to get on top. This generation is far from over, as sales are low compared to last generation. Right now the competition is over new features and hardware accessories, something of which past consoles were not as capable.

Right now the battle is in profit and recouping past losses from console development and consoles sold at loss. The strategy has been add new features to stay ahead of the competitor, all while reducing component costs to bring a cheaper retail price to the consumer. Counting Nintendo as a different market segment is somewhat correct, because third party titles have fared terribly on the system, something which points to the fact that the core gamers aren't using the Wii for core gaming.

Nintendo is going to ride this generation as long as they stay relevant, which in the advent of multi-console homes, and the Wii user base is expanding by means other than the core market. This will continue, they've never even dropped the price. Major point for them, so a price drop might net more purchases.
Microsoft and Sony both have room to grow as price comes down, and more features are implemented. Both are already researching the next console, and next generation might just be a shorter generation than this one. Likely costs are going to be more standardized, Sony isn't investing in a CELL-like chip and Blu-ray is continually dropping in part costs. The big features are going to be there, and new ones they thought of in the mean time... but this generation will be around for awhile. Both don't want to rush out a system again, especially with missing features. Both are going to want the initial production cost to be lower, potentially lower than this generation (especially Sony), and neither are in fear of becoming irrelevant in this generation and have a great deal of room to grow. In prior generations, one competitor tends to start losing the edge, and realizes a new product is necessary.

One company tends to push the generation jump, and neither company is really in the position to do so, not only because of development cost, but also need to top the competitor. Both are doing that fine with software and hardware accessories. Again, Nintendo is in its own little world this generation, and will likely continue to do so until third party developers abandon the system, or sales ultimately near peak. They've been raking in profits by not dropping the price, so the latter definitely isn't imminent. Nintendo might cause the generation jump if they decide to get back into the core-gamer market, but they seem content to redefine their market rather than compete with two others for the typical market. And hell, why not? Their new style of market has a far wider market reach - my parents bought one. My parents, buying a video game console. My sister and her husband bought one, but non-gamers of the typical sort. It was a unique strategy, and it's working. They have no pressure to change that strategy. Might have lost some fans, but gained a lot of news one to replace them. In the end they care about numbers, not the fans that make up those numbers and their personal interests. If they need to change to meet the wants of numbers, it is because they need those sales. Nintendo isn't anywhere near that position.
 

destrekor

Lifer
Nov 18, 2005
28,799
359
126
Originally posted by: brblx
and the sony fanboy destroys another thread.

no fanboy has been evident in this thread, surprisingly. So what thread are you reading?
All that has been posted so far is speculation and facts of the current generation. Financials is the biggest component of the market for the console companies, and the only posts I can see you finding offensive are ones discussing financials and decision making related to financials.

To the gamer, it's all about features and how cool games are. The companies don't care about that. Some of the people in the companies might be big fans of gaming and want these cool features, these cool things in a game, but it's all a game of topping someone else, getting something out there to get money rolling in again, how to make games work on as many systems as possible, with budget constantly in the minds of the top execs.
 

brblx

Diamond Member
Mar 23, 2009
5,499
2
0
i was referring to ben. he always starts with a long, competent argument and slowly devolves into fanboy mudslinging.

he can be as subtle as he wants, it's too close to trolling for my liking.
 

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
he always starts with a long, competent argument and slowly devolves into fanboy mudslinging.

Please explain exactly how pointing out anything involving media limitations in that latter life cycle of this generation is akin to mudslinging? MS made a tradeoff when they were nailing down the design for the 360, they could have gone HD-DVD and pushed the launch of their system back and increased the price, or they could of launched when they did at the price point they did. They made the decission that they wanted to be the first system with an installed base of 10 million units this generation, a task that they accomplished. The downside to this, which we all knew before any of the systems even launched this generation, is that they were going to run into limitations in their media choice before Sony did.

I have not once said they made the wrong choice, I am simply pointing out the reality of that choice on their long term options. Sony has been paying the price all along in their choice, they launched a year later and spotted MS a hefty lead along with carrying a much heavier price point throughout the first three years of this generation. That was Sony's choice, I also am not saying that that was a wrong choice. It was a tradeoff they made, that choice was likely mainly focused on quickly ending the format war as they stood far more to gain from a set HD format then the other companies involved, and another was it alowed them to avoid media storage issues throughout this generation.

As in most business decissions, there are pros and cons. If you want to spot a fanboy, it's the guy that always sees the pros from their company of choice, the cons from their competitor and can not comprehend the counterparts to each.