NEXT-Gen Consoles

[brblx]

perhaps i was being a bit harsh. i will say that i don't think the optical drives in current consoles have much to do with the tech in next gen consoles or when they will be available. if bluray really starts to eliminate DVD as the standard format, yeah, maybe it will push microsoft into the next gen faster, but i really don't see that.

my issue is more with the way you word things and the little jabs you seem to include which always seem to allude to sony somehow being a superior company.

Forza3 is 2 DVDs with half the content of GT5

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

Either devs will be continually forced to compromise their games for cross platform titles

Six DVDs with devs paying an enormous penalty to MS for every game shipped or one BRD with normal royalty payments?

that kind of stuff. zero of which has truth to it, so why post it? the bulk of your argument seems to be cost, yet tim willits of id has even come out and said that there are no 'per disc' royalties paid to microsoft, leaving the only difference in cost to manufacturing. how much does it cost to make a blu-ray disc right now? how 'bout dvd's?

 

[BenSkywalker]

if bluray really starts to eliminate DVD as the standard format, yeah, maybe it will push microsoft into the next gen faster, but i really don't see that.

DVD9 isn't going to hold more as games ship with more content, it just isn't going to happen. Game are shipping with more and more content, that's why multidisk titles are starting to become more frequent on the upcoming release schedule.

the bulk of your argument seems to be cost, yet tim willits of id has even come out and said that there are no 'per disc' royalties paid to microsoft,

He did last year, Carmack went on record a couple of months ago stating that MS would charge them considerably more if they went over 2 disks(seemed he was calling them out over the Doom4 issue moreso then Rage). For the comments you took issue with-

Forza3 v GT5- GT5 is shipping with over 800 cars, all of their 'normal' tracks, the full NASCAR circuit and the WRC circuit. Forza3 has half, to be generous, the content of GT5 and requires multiple disks. That is factually accurate.

The PS1 comment was a joke, I even had an emoticon there for those that were slow witted so they could pick up on that. Back in the day I used to have to go around to the back of my TV and push a slider to 'Console' to get it to play games and we all did it without griping. Doesn't mean it would fly today. Standards change. I used to have a stack of memory cards, thanks to the original XBox we no longer have to deal with that nasty old legacy any longer(well, unless we want to play GC games on the Wii).

You cut off the comment about devs being forced to cut content, the publishers can opt to pay more to get the same results.

Six DVDs is how much it takes to cover a 50GB BRD. The royalty payement structure has been touched on very recently by Carmack. Unlike Tim, he doesn't try and sugar coat things(one of the reasons I love reading his commentary so much- straight honesty).

 

[brblx]

i'll agree to disagree.

i will say that the forza3 comment seemed like a jab. sure, call it factually accurate if you want to just add up the number of 'things'. but if the depth of GT5 isn't damn near christlike in comparison to GT4, i certainly don't see forza3 as being half the game. i don't see what you're going on besides numbers here- the only GT5 gameplay (the somewhat terribly priced prologue) we've gotten so far was GT4 with a graphics update. and i say this as someone who really liked GT4, but i and everyone else i know hailed forza1 as better when it was released. sorry if that seems like fanboyism on my part.

yeah, i knew you were joking with the PS1 comment, but i just didn't see the relevancy to the 360 with it.

i'll look into the id thing, i didn't know carmack had come out with something different. is there any other source for MS charging per disc royalties? moreover, i'd love to know how much sony collects per BD disc and per game in comparison to MS, but i would doubt we'll ever know.

 

[arod]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

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.

If anything I would say microsoft bet against physical media completely. They only used hd-dvd to kill any chance sony had of having dvd level success with bluray. And they also bet the others would have to adopt online to keep up. From that perspective I would say they have been proved 90% correct. Nintendo is lagging behind but even sony who packs a bd drive in every ps3 had to start a online movie store. And now ms is bringing full game downloads which will be the next step in that online ecosystem.

The big advantage to doing this is it makes the space issue irrelevant (provided ms ever ships a big hard drive model). Because you are able to redownload the games anytime you want the physical size of the games is irrelevant. The only issue comes in with isp's limitations. I think the caps will continue to be shot down and the tech will improve to achieve even faster speeds that what we think of now.

 

[BenSkywalker]

sure, call it factually accurate if you want to just add up the number of 'things'.

The number of 'things' would be content, which is what I'm talking about

i don't see what you're going on besides numbers here- the only GT5 gameplay (the somewhat terribly priced prologue) we've gotten so far was GT4 with a graphics update.

You might want to try GT5P out. Either you haven't, or you don't know anything at all about racing games(I'm going with you haven't played it, GT5P isn't GT4HD). Physics model on it smokes Forza2, by a long shot; 16 player online is real nice too for a demo

If anything I would say microsoft bet against physical media completely.

I think it is safe to say that is the one thing we can say with 100% certainty MS did not do. What is the most popular selling model of the 360? How much storage capacity does it have? They can try and talk the talk, but it takes no effort at all to know they were betting on removeable media for this generation.

And they also bet the others would have to adopt online to keep up. From that perspective I would say they have been proved 90% correct. Nintendo is lagging behind but even sony who packs a bd drive in every ps3 had to start a online movie store. And now ms is bringing full game downloads which will be the next step in that online ecosystem.

An online ecosystem isn't part of this generation- only one console comes packed with a HD by default, and that isn't the company people are claiming are pushing it. Next generation that has a very small chance of being a major factor, but it is a very small chance. For all the hype, for all the talk, only 1/3 of 360 users are Gold players. I'm not saying that online isn't an important part of the marketplace now, but it certainly isn't remotely close to being the dominant factor. BTW- Sony has been selling full version games on line for quite a while now, MS is playing a bit of catch up on that front.

The big advantage to doing this is it makes the space issue irrelevant (provided ms ever ships a big hard drive model).

0GB, how many games you going to install on a 0GB HD? That may well be MS's long term goal, but it very clearly is not for this generation. Right now PS3 users can get a 500GB HD for $90(wasn't looking for best price, quick pop on NewEgg and saw a random laptop drive)- $140 for a 120GB drive for the 360. Just on a realistic basis here, who is positioned for an online ecosystem? I do not consider that a factor this generation at all honestly, if it were however, Sony would have a MUCH bigger advantage in that aspect then MS does.

The only issue comes in with isp's limitations. I think the caps will continue to be shot down and the tech will improve to achieve even faster speeds that what we think of now.

They had better, and HDs need to expand a staggering amount too. Online HD movies lag quite a bit behind their media based counterparts and redownloading games constantly is going to skyrocket bandwidth demands a rather staggering amount world wide. That is how it relates to upcoming generations however, and is a bit out of place in this thread. The one thing that is very safe to say is that MS at no point whatsoever took the idea of online being the driving force of this generation seriously as far as distribution. If they had, there is absolutely zero chance they would be shipping the majority of their systems without any HD at all.

 

[fr]

I'll put my money on late 2012.

 

[tatteredpotato]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

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.

I don't know much about Rage and Doom 4, but some of the quick stuff I've looked up seems to indicate they're supposed to showcase on the PC, and perhaps the console don't quite have what it takes to take full advantage of this "megatexturing".

Of course they could as well, I'm just a skeptic that waits until the disk(s) are in my possession before passing judgement.

Also you can't bet if multi-dvd games become that mainstream, then MS will do something in regards to their royalty fees. They most likely have them high to prevent a company from putting a game out that needlessly takes up several discs. MS and id are both businesses and things like royalty fees aren't set in stone.

Also anyone that has played a multi disc game on the 360, are there APIs to disable returning to the dashboard when the disc tray is opened. For example when it asks to swap discs, does it pop you back to the dashboard like every other time you eject the disc?

 

[tw1164]

Originally posted by: ObscureCaucasian

Also anyone that has played a multi disc game on the 360, are there APIs to disable returning to the dashboard when the disc tray is opened. For example when it asks to swap discs, does it pop you back to the dashboard like every other time you eject the disc?

It's just like every other system, you're prompted to save and it asks for the next disc. I played Blue Dragon and it was a 3 disc game. Each disc had the overworld/dungeons on it, you don't switch disc every 30 mins.

 

[tw1164]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

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.

I would expect for the Wii to come in new colors this holiday season. The Wii will drop to 199.99 next summer and a Wii-HD (720p) to come out for Xmas 2010. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

 

[dguy6789]

I don't expect a Wii HD to come out anytime soon at all. There really is no reason at all to increase the manufacturing costs of a machine that is already leading the pack in sales by a huge margin.

 

[tommo123]

i hope quite soon. the graphics are lame compared to what current gpus can put out - e.g crysis.

i'm hoping the games are stored on flash drives to get around access times and the crappy read speed of optical drives. this is MS btw, i expect sony to stay with BD

 

[tatteredpotato]

Originally posted by: tommo123
i hope quite soon. the graphics are lame compared to what current gpus can put out - e.g crysis.

i'm hoping the games are stored on flash drives to get around access times and the crappy read speed of optical drives. this is MS btw, i expect sony to stay with BD

The number of people who aren't happy with the current generations graphical capabilities are definitely not the majority. MS and Sony caught some flak this generation from a lot of mainstream customers who said they couldn't tell the difference between last and current gen. Besides most of the die hard graphics people aren't gaming on consoles anyways, so I don't see that as a driving factor either. Sure pretty graphics are nice, but I'm content with riding this generation out for a couple more years.

I highly doubt that there will be any form or flash memory capable of storing that capacity for anywhere near the price needed.

 

[Golgatha]

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.

Actually, I think Nintendo will release their next-gen console first. I imagine it to be a 720p, HDMI having beast with full BC to the previous console. I also imagine you can use your Nintendo account to transfer past VC purchases to the new unit. Finally, I would be they'll have BC with previous controllers, but you'll want to upgrade because they'll combine the WiiMote and WM+ into one unit that's the same form factor as the current WiiMote.

 

[A5]

Originally posted by: tommo123
i hope quite soon. the graphics are lame compared to what current gpus can put out - e.g crysis.

i'm hoping the games are stored on flash drives to get around access times and the crappy read speed of optical drives. this is MS btw, i expect sony to stay with BD

Flash would have to get much, much cheaper to compete with the cost of pressing BDs. Publishers would kill MS if they did this.

 

[tommo123]

Originally posted by: ObscureCaucasian

Originally posted by: tommo123
i hope quite soon. the graphics are lame compared to what current gpus can put out - e.g crysis.

i'm hoping the games are stored on flash drives to get around access times and the crappy read speed of optical drives. this is MS btw, i expect sony to stay with BD

I highly doubt that there will be any form or flash memory capable of storing that capacity for anywhere near the price needed.

really? flash costs just pennies nowadays letalone in 3-4 years or whenever the new consoles come out. no worries regarding scratches, would be superior to read from in every way from an optical drive. no hard drive needed for game saves since a small amount of writable space is enough on the cartridge itself.

download only is not going to happen for the next xbox. far far too many ISPs have throttling and download limits and i can't see microsoft using bluray due to it being associated with sony so strongly. they sure as hell can't stick to dvd9

 

[BenSkywalker]

I don't know much about Rage and Doom 4, but some of the quick stuff I've looked up seems to indicate they're supposed to showcase on the PC, and perhaps the console don't quite have what it takes to take full advantage of this "megatexturing".

Like every other graphical effect we have, PCs have more power to drive them then the consoles do.

Of course they could as well, I'm just a skeptic that waits until the disk(s) are in my possession before passing judgement.

This thread is based on prediction

Also you can't bet if multi-dvd games become that mainstream, then MS will do something in regards to their royalty fees. They most likely have them high to prevent a company from putting a game out that needlessly takes up several discs. MS and id are both businesses and things like royalty fees aren't set in stone.

This is true, but that starts to cut into margins for MS also. I think we have all seen ample demonstration of MS wanting to maximize every cent of revenue they can from their platform.

really? flash costs just pennies nowadays letalone in 3-4 years or whenever the new consoles come out.

Really, where? The cheapest 32GB flash I could find was $69, compared to a 50GB BRD which has a cost of ~$1. Don't get me wrong, I would love for carts to come back into the mainstream if they were viable, but they aren't even close.

 

[tatteredpotato]

Originally posted by: tommo123

Originally posted by: ObscureCaucasian

Originally posted by: tommo123
i hope quite soon. the graphics are lame compared to what current gpus can put out - e.g crysis.

i'm hoping the games are stored on flash drives to get around access times and the crappy read speed of optical drives. this is MS btw, i expect sony to stay with BD

I highly doubt that there will be any form or flash memory capable of storing that capacity for anywhere near the price needed.

really? flash costs just pennies nowadays letalone in 3-4 years or whenever the new consoles come out. no worries regarding scratches, would be superior to read from in every way from an optical drive. no hard drive needed for game saves since a small amount of writable space is enough on the cartridge itself.

download only is not going to happen for the next xbox. far far too many ISPs have throttling and download limits and i can't see microsoft using bluray due to it being associated with sony so strongly. they sure as hell can't stick to dvd9

True, I may have spoken too soon on the price of flash, I forgot you can get 16 gig SD cards for 15 bucks these days, and I'm sure by 2012 (assuming that is the timeframe we're looking at) 32 gig cards could easily be massed produced for only a couple bucks. I'm sure it'll be quite a bit more than the pennies it'll cost to make a Blu Ray by then,

With that idea, leave more than a small amount of writable space so theres room for a few gigs of DLC.

I do like the idea, however it still comes down to cost, however Nintendo was able to do it for a long time with their consoles but it was always a big sticking point with publishers to have to deal with carts.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: tommo123

Originally posted by: ObscureCaucasian

Originally posted by: tommo123
i hope quite soon. the graphics are lame compared to what current gpus can put out - e.g crysis.

i'm hoping the games are stored on flash drives to get around access times and the crappy read speed of optical drives. this is MS btw, i expect sony to stay with BD

I highly doubt that there will be any form or flash memory capable of storing that capacity for anywhere near the price needed.

really? flash costs just pennies nowadays letalone in 3-4 years or whenever the new consoles come out. no worries regarding scratches, would be superior to read from in every way from an optical drive. no hard drive needed for game saves since a small amount of writable space is enough on the cartridge itself.

download only is not going to happen for the next xbox. far far too many ISPs have throttling and download limits and i can't see microsoft using bluray due to it being associated with sony so strongly. they sure as hell can't stick to dvd9

Flash does not cost pennies. Sure, for small usb flash drives it may, but not for serious storage capacity. Also, even if it ends up only costing $5-10 for a 16gb, 32gb, 64gb flash drive, that might be cheap in the eyes of a consumer, but not to the publisher. Optical media is far less than that for the publishing world, and if media costs $5 or $10, the cost of the game is going up.

Flash media is NOT the next storage media for games. I actually doubt it ever will be. What happens when one all of a sudden dies? Will the publisher replace it for free, or charge for a replacement. If next generation consoles bring about faster Blu-ray drives, BD media will be the best thing consoles have seen. You cannot scratch BD media (commercial media, with the hard coat on it), and with increased drive speed, access speeds with high storage will be a great feature. And BD has room to grow in storage size, and I honestly wouldn't doubt if Sony upped the PS4's capability to handle BD-QL (quad-layer). Much like the PS2, where manufacturers could use either DVD or DVD-DL, and hell, some first gen games even came on CD-ROM. Sony mandated all games use BD-ROM this time, but it would be a nice feature to allow the publishers to choose between BD-ROM, BD-DL, and BD-QL, with storage capacities of 25gb, 50gb, and 100gb.
If Microsoft does not choose to be humble and accept using BD-ROM for next gen, something is wrong with them. Next generation absolutely cannot depend on download only, for large games it would take far too long.

 

[tommo123]

why would it fail? the odds of a disk being scratched in a 360 is far higher and MS have been bitches about that, why would flash carts be any different? all these SSD drives coming out, one of the selling points is that if it fails, you'll still be able to read the data that's on it. just not add any more or alter what's there.

microsoft? humble?
i really cant see them biting their tongues and using BD. as you said, download only is not a realistic option. what's left?

 

[mugs]

Microsoft would use Blu-Ray now that it's the established successor to DVD.

 

[Glitchny]

Originally posted by: brblx
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 a troll? no way.

At least I'm not the only one who noticed the thinly veiled anti-MS pro-Sony slant to every single one of his posts.

As to the OP, Sony stated that they wanted the PS3 to have a life of 10 years, so I don't think we will see a new console from them anytime soon. And other than upgraded versions of a Wii I think the first "Next Gen" console next round will be from MS again in a couple years.

 

[herkulease]

Pioneer already demonstrated 16 layers for 400gb that's compatible with most systems today.(Ok, I should say they claim it is, Likely a firmware update and poof.) 400gigs is plenty of space. though I doubt they'll ever make use of it in a console. I figure somewhere in the 50gb to 100gb range will do. I have yet to see a ps3 game even fill up 25GB of unique data. None of the padding and duplicates.

I don't know why people really think Microsoft won't use Bluray. the specs mandate use of their VC-1 codec along with AVC and somethign else I can't remember, in the end it doesn't really matter to them. By 2012 or so the cost will come down and they'll put it in there. Microsoft simply didn't want to take such a big lost by putting hddvd or bluray drive in the 360 and drive up their cost of the 360 @ launch.

The only thing with Microsoft and even sony is whether you can upgrade on your own the hard drive. the fact that people are willing to for teh 120gb drive is music to both their ears. Who would want o pass up some 400% mark up.

 

[Fox5]

I could see nintendo going back to carts since most of the games sold on their own. Still, $5 or $10 a cart is a big expense compared to optical disks, it really makes me wonder why nintendo didn't go cd for the n64. Sure, 1994 may have been a bit too big of a compromise for cd, but 1996, almost 1997 should have had it.

BTW, I think the next consoles would be smart to hold off until 2012/2013. Traditional silicon manufacturing is going to hit a wall around then, so there won't be any big shifts in technology for a while after that.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: Glitchny

Originally posted by: brblx
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 a troll? no way.

At least I'm not the only one who noticed the thinly veiled anti-MS pro-Sony slant to every single one of his posts.

As to the OP, Sony stated that they wanted the PS3 to have a life of 10 years, so I don't think we will see a new console from them anytime soon. And other than upgraded versions of a Wii I think the first "Next Gen" console next round will be from MS again in a couple years.

The PS2 is still alive.
10 year lifespan doesn't mean 10 years between consoles. It just means they support it for 10 years.
Companies still make PS2 games, it's still sells like hotcakes, especially when considering it's age.

 

[tatteredpotato]

Originally posted by: Glitchny

Originally posted by: brblx
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 a troll? no way.

At least I'm not the only one who noticed the thinly veiled anti-MS pro-Sony slant to every single one of his posts.

In his defense a "thinly veiled slant" != "fanboi troll"... Otherwise I think we'd all be guilty of fanboyism.