SuperSonic1305
Member
PS3 was the cheapest blu-ray player at launch....
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
David Jaffe: "The next generation of hardware will be the last consoles."
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
PS3 was the cheapest blu-ray player at launch....
Honestly, I think the only area where we can go full blown crazy with visuals and not care about latency are turn based strategy games. You could probably even doe a light mix: you have all the menu stuff kept to the side and rendered locally, sending necessary bits of information back and forth while being able to take the time streaming for a really high quality image. Though even then you'll probably get a few hiccups and it'd feel sluggish just because of the slight delay between input and output.
Still, I'll be amazed if they can really find a solution to latency that renders it a non-issue, but that'd probably require these server houses practically EVERYWHERE, and while I imagine it's relatively easy for urban areas, rural ones will likely be screwed.
they could when they unplug the ethernet cable
The lag issues can be dealt with, but the problem is that the people who want lower-lag tech in telecoms (companies like Gaikai and Onlive) aren't the same as the people who'd have to actually pay for and install it (the telecoms operators). If fixed-line telecoms was a properly functioning, fully competitive industry, we'd all already have 100Mbps FTTH with sub 1ms lag by now, but unfortunately it's not, and I don't see it improving a whole lot in the near future.
I'm pretty sure there's a Harrison Ford gif for posts like this one...
Also: just what IS the bandwidth that'd be taken up for, say, a full 10 hour game? Nevermind a 50 hour RPG, I recall that Netflix streams were about DVD size, and I imagine at some point it's going to just be more practical to download the game and play locally. Guess that depends on how much using tons of bandwidth matters though, but it's why I think a one platform standardized SoC is more likely to happen, the "streaming future" can then merely be downloading necessary assets and running locally.
radioheadrule83
Banned
Dave,
how do you feel about what I suggested on the last page?
Do you think they will continue to try input innovations to justify consoles? Is Nintendo's attempt at a social approach with Wii-U indicative of where they are going to try and go as well?
Can Sony (or any of the others) still make huge blockbuster budget games if the gaming world goes stream-heavy? Even if they can manage their own streaming services / use their own Smart TVs and set tops, and get third parties on board with those -- upstarts could challenge them in ways that they do not currently... it becomes easier for the likes of Valve, Apple, Gakai / OnLive (assuming these aren't bought up), Google, Facebook, Gree or others to challenge their content channels.
Surely those manufacturer royalties would begin to dry up?
No, I just think it's a "solution" that will work financially, but that I (and people on GAF or people like John Carmack) won't like at all. They'll simply claim it's not an issue, do a lot of PR work on that, and it will probably be "good enough" for many casual gamers. Already the latency in 30 FPS console titles can get up to 100 ms and some people are fine with that.
So yeah, in my opinion everyone who likes skill-based action games of any kind should be wary of a 100% streaming-only future.
Deified Data
Banned
10 years is too soon, but everything's eventual.
Marty Chinn
Member
I think they went into this knowing it's a numbers game. Casuals will care less about latency than the core gamer and there are more casuals than core. I've tried OnLive and honestly I'm surprised how well it works most of the time with a pad, but the latency becomes glaringly obvious when you use a mouse instead in a FPS. Latency is going to be hard to overcome given the physics of networking, so I really do think it comes down to banking that more people won't notice or care rather than it being a problem to solve.
No physical game purchases is a no sell for me. I don't care how it's done, relying on a connection for all games is far too risky of an endeavor for me to fully embrace, unless it's a game that actually needs online outside of streaming. The generation that happens is the generation I bail. There are various issues that come up with such a process too, but those issues are only on the consumer, not the company. Sales can be locked at fixed prices, for one, and we've seen how terrible that gets with downloadable titles on consoles today..
Silly.Mikey
Banned
Netflix is proof enough that itll never happen.
Guy1: "Netflix is really successful, do we add our movies to it?"
Guy2: "Lets make our own Netflix and have all the profits!"
Dark Octave
Banned
I think this guy is so awesome but I never agree with anything he says. One console future...gtfo. Still my boy though.
Actually I do agree with him on the WiiU.
Actually I do agree with him on the WiiU.
PhoenixDark
Banned
I don't agree with Jaffe on many things, but he's right about the WiiU. That casual market moved to Apple quite swiftly. They had some fun with the Wii but ultimately never truly became long standing, purchasing members of the market; instead they showed up whenever lightning hit (Wii Fit) and disappeared afterward, and now only pull out the Wii at holiday parties.
Nintendo seems to be half assing so much of the WiiU that it's hard to see it doing much of anything, outside of a successful launch. You'd think Nintendo would not just be paying attention to Apple's tablet, but Apple's software and how easy it is to purchase through iTunes and other things. Yet here's Iwata saying the online system will be eh, whatevs.
God dammit, make your own iTunes, put Mario and Zelda shit on there constantly for low prices, alongside original iPhone-type games for low prices. Download directly to the controller or 3DS. Profit.
Nintendo seems to be half assing so much of the WiiU that it's hard to see it doing much of anything, outside of a successful launch. You'd think Nintendo would not just be paying attention to Apple's tablet, but Apple's software and how easy it is to purchase through iTunes and other things. Yet here's Iwata saying the online system will be eh, whatevs.
God dammit, make your own iTunes, put Mario and Zelda shit on there constantly for low prices, alongside original iPhone-type games for low prices. Download directly to the controller or 3DS. Profit.
By the way, while I'd lean in favor of keeping my hardware/software local, I DO love the idea of integrating streaming in something like Steam in conjunction with how it works now. The idea of buying the game, playing it on a powerful PC, then playing it on the go on a weaker laptop or even tablet is great, and even better the angle that if I overestimated my computer and it runs like crap, hey, I have an out to STILL play the game until (if?) I upgrade. Or I can just use it to play a game others can watch easily, like on Onlive.
Conciliator
Banned
A lot. But it would probably be cheaper then selling consoles at a loss to 20 million people.
Game2Death
Banned
I'm going to kind of dart of course a bit, then come back all relevant I swear. ha
I can see this happening maybe not in 10 years, but 15 maybe 20:
*Walk into carrier store*
-Customer buys a device, I'm going to go with Window's Phone to stay relevant. Phone now has insane steraming speeds with new tech.
-Clerk asks what service's would you like?
-For music? Pandora+ (let's say if you pay you can pick songs and make playlists now)
-For Movies? Netflix
-For Tv shows? Hulu
-For Live TV service? DirectTV
-For games? Xbox Games Service
That'll be $250 a month and $20 fee for the all-in-one device.
BUT thats your Xbox Live fee, cable, Netflix, and Hulu all rolled into one fee.
AND there are apps you can log into on all devices with our "app" or whatever it is called that lets you do all this on your tv with you account info. And there is your Xbox OS that we have now.
Don't have a tv that does that? Your device or phone can stream or plug right into your tv. And a controller that is about $60 wirelessly connects to your phone to play.
I see it happening.
One day the streaming service guys are going to do to the console makers what Microsoft did to IBM (and what Sony tried to do to Nintendo) but not today. They've still got a few issues to sort out first.
That said, a generation or two sounds about right, depending on how long the generations last.
That said, a generation or two sounds about right, depending on how long the generations last.
I live in the UK. We have bad speeds overall. Sweden is very high up: http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/Images/commentarynews/broadbandspeedchart.jpg
Developing countries get the older hardware. They are still making and selling lots of PS2's in poorer countries, is part of the reason you can still get hold of things like accessories brand new.
Streaming is ok for monthly access. It is worrying when it comes down to owing and streaming an individual game and the company goes bust etc. Owning the game on the hard drive/physically, is still important to us older types. But generations growing up, with fast internet everywhere and wireless with access to services and so much more content, won't feel so attached to material copies of digital content.
ultrazilla
Gold Member
I've been gaming since the Atari 2600 days. Home consoles aren't going anywhere. If anything, it'll be MS and Sony who "abandon" dedicated systems and simply build it into tablets or smart tvs.
I think Nintendo will be around for the long haul as they "get" the industry. I'm not so sure Sony and MS do, even with some decent home consoles between them.
Nintendo saved the video game industry with the NES after the Atari crash. They were around before Sony and MS got "into" the industry and I'm willing to be they'll "be there" after MS and Sony abandon home consoles.
I still like collecting physical media/games/blu-ray movies, magazines, etc. There will always be a market for tangible goods and anyone who thinks this stuff will disappear is mistaken imo.
I think Nintendo will be around for the long haul as they "get" the industry. I'm not so sure Sony and MS do, even with some decent home consoles between them.
Nintendo saved the video game industry with the NES after the Atari crash. They were around before Sony and MS got "into" the industry and I'm willing to be they'll "be there" after MS and Sony abandon home consoles.
I still like collecting physical media/games/blu-ray movies, magazines, etc. There will always be a market for tangible goods and anyone who thinks this stuff will disappear is mistaken imo.
kruis
Exposing the sinister cartel of retailers who allow companies to pay for advertising space.
I don't think companies like Sony and Nintendo would want a future where ever game is streamed to an Internet connected display. Putting the actual game in the cloud is far more costly than just uploading data or a server managing online players for some online shooter.
Could you imagine the logistics and operating costs of data warehouses stacked with tens of millions PS5s running 24x7 so Joe Blo is spared the nuisance of having a physical console under the TV?
And they're gone.... Point?
radioheadrule83
Banned
I agree they'd do well to pinch a few IOS / Android titles for their eShops, but do you not think their homescreen trending miiverse idea will work quite well for creating a buzz about games people don't necessarily own? Its sort of an always visible recommendations screen.
Goldrusher
Member
or they could go the wii route (make a new console that is only slightly more powerful but has more (streaming?) features or new method of controls).
I agree.
Sadly
This was literally said after ColecoVision, and then after NES.
Silly.Mikey
Banned
You just described xbox360, but now im paying 250$ a month. Why would i like this.
The more I see this spread around, the more it amazes me some are honestly looking forward to this idea of a future where gaming is divided. It's not going to "current gamers" and "retro gamers" by choice, it'll be then-current gamers and those who don't have a choice at all but to play older systems.
This is a terrible future to look forward to, if for no other reason it means a decreased market.
Unless the Star Trek, everything is communist free, future comes true. I don't see that happening either by Next Generation. Hell of an Enterprise though.
This is a terrible future to look forward to, if for no other reason it means a decreased market.
Unless the Star Trek, everything is communist free, future comes true. I don't see that happening either by Next Generation. Hell of an Enterprise though.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
I couldn't disagree more. How will developers make games for TVs if they don't all have the same hardware? Will they all be server based and just streamed to my TV?
If so I hope ISPs will be piping strong broadband internet to every home in America. Rural and in the inner cities. And I hope it's unlimited, 1 Gigabyte per second or more, and only cost $10 a month.
It's the only way this works.
Metalmurphy
Member
1GB/s? oO
Game2Death
Banned
Never said you would...but it's the general consumer base. You get 2/3 of those COD players to buy this?
#GameChanger
If I have to stream to play, I quit gaming. I quite like having my own hardware, and running software on it. Call me old fashioned or whatever, but I'm not prepared to have an eventless evening because BT decided to crap out on me, or my cloud gaming provider needs to perform "routine maintenance". No thank you.
Plus I hate input lag, and we'll never beat that floaty lag feeling OnLive has unless we can get data around the net at faster than the speed of light. Well, unless there are predictive algorithms in the game that are advanced enough to know roughly when a player is going to react, and pre-empt it. But then current gen games practically play themselves already, so I'm not sure I'd want it to get any more automated.
I'm not sure cloud gaming has ever been a threat to PC anyway, which is pretty much what I exclusively play outside of handhelds nowadays. In my eye it's always been pegged to replace the consoles rather than PC.
But do I think next-gen will be the last gen? Possibly. I'll wait and see how exciting the PS4 and the new Xbox are before I go all Nostradamus with these things.
Plus I hate input lag, and we'll never beat that floaty lag feeling OnLive has unless we can get data around the net at faster than the speed of light. Well, unless there are predictive algorithms in the game that are advanced enough to know roughly when a player is going to react, and pre-empt it. But then current gen games practically play themselves already, so I'm not sure I'd want it to get any more automated.
I'm not sure cloud gaming has ever been a threat to PC anyway, which is pretty much what I exclusively play outside of handhelds nowadays. In my eye it's always been pegged to replace the consoles rather than PC.
But do I think next-gen will be the last gen? Possibly. I'll wait and see how exciting the PS4 and the new Xbox are before I go all Nostradamus with these things.
Kung Fu Grip
Banned
I know my opinion doesn't mean much on gaf, but im sorry, consoles are not going anywhere anytime soon. Everyone is so quick to say streaming/downloading is the future without realising there's still a large amout of people with average connections speeds. Don't get me started on DRM's and server crashes internet fucks up "lol you don't really own this product" type BS.
Physical media and physical boxes will always be here. They will coexist with streaming just as today.
I expect the next console from nintendo in 2018 going by their schedule.
Physical media and physical boxes will always be here. They will coexist with streaming just as today.
I expect the next console from nintendo in 2018 going by their schedule.
Marty Chinn
Member
I grew up with similar a similar gaming experience, except I didn't own a Atari 2600 (cousins did though) and I was an Apple ][+ gamer then. My first real console was a NES and my first transition was the SNES. I remember thinking back then how awesome and exciting console transitions are and how I'd probably get to experience another 10 to 15 generations of consoles at an average of 5 years a generation. I now no longer thing this will happen and I think it's only a matter of time before traditional consoles as we know it no longer exist. The current model just won't sustain itself over the long haul and something is going to give.
I also still like my physical media and I think DD has issues, but I also think this is also only a matter of time. Fortunately, there still are major barriers preventing it from being the primary/only method so I think we still have some time to enjoy our physical products, but that is something we'll see disappear in my lifetime.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Perhaps, but it's not like online services have not advertised games on their online systems before. So much of the Apple/smartphone market is dependent of impulse buying, why not make it very simple to spend money with the system in as many places as possible. And to do that you need a robust, impressive online service - not some shit thrown together because "we're different."
Software drives systems, but with this gen we saw social gaming drove sales/systems as well. The 360 crushed the PS3 in the US part because of XBL; people wanted to play the same games with their friends, on the same system. Not just exclusive games like Halo (or Resistance for PS3), but multiconsole games like CoD and Madden. What incentive is there for anyone to buy a Madden or CoD on the WiiU? The controller? We already saw how vapid first and third developers used the DS touch screen, I'd imagine the same will happen with this.
In the end Nintendo will be stuck with another system predominantly used to sell Nintendo games. And when the casual market's initial interest in the system disappears, there's no way mainstream gamers flock to the system to buy ports of games they'd rather play with their friends on the 360 or PS3.
EatinOlives
Member
Silly.Mikey
Banned
I don't understand then. Why am i paying 250$ in 20 years when i do all that now on 360 and it costs me 40$ for live, nothing for Zune (unless u rent something) and 8$ for netflix.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
god bless nintendo.
Not true at all. You could get very high quality DVD players for 200 bucks in late 2000.
DVD's came out in early 97 and PS2 was late 2000. That's almost a 3year gap. The release Blu-Ray and PS3 on the other hand was only about a 6 month gap.
Game2Death
Banned
That's your cell phone, cable, netflix, live, and all that. Every service you pay for in one bill. And no box required. Streamed from their servers. Not to mention maybe even your internet too...possibilities endless man
Henry Jones Jr
Member
Yeah, this could happen. In 10 years I'll be 36 years old and probably wont give a fuck.
Rollo Lawson
Banned
If you look at where we were 10 years ago, you can see that 10 years is an extremely long time. I say we will see it a little sooner...5-7 years.
Chuck Norris
Banned
There isn't? What should I play games with?
IdreamofHIME
Member
It's mental that people think a stream service can possibly replace consoles...within 10 years.
Except a few major US cities, Japan, Hong Kong and S.Korea, who has the bandwidth to allow such a thing to happen within a reasonable cost?
Youre cutting out such a major slice of your profit pie if you go that route and ignore everyone else, but the short sighted greed that runs the industry is probably capable of luring some poor company into that minefield.
Except a few major US cities, Japan, Hong Kong and S.Korea, who has the bandwidth to allow such a thing to happen within a reasonable cost?
Youre cutting out such a major slice of your profit pie if you go that route and ignore everyone else, but the short sighted greed that runs the industry is probably capable of luring some poor company into that minefield.
shinobi602
Member
That's all you should have said Jaffe.
Silly.Mikey
Banned
Ahh, its all in one service. Well, it would be a lot less hassle that's for sure. But the way i see it, just the movie studios today cant even agree on Netflix so i dont see how or why everyone would agree on this. I still don't see that happening.
Edit: If anything, we will be paying a lot more for a lot less. Just like xbox live does now but worst. We already pay for live, netflix, HBO app, DLC, TV app etc... and its only gonna get worst.