Support NeoGAF

[Raploz]

Console generations are getting longer and longer. In the past it was common to get new console generations every 5 years, with the PS360+ era we got a 7 year generation, and now with PS5/Xbox Series Microsoft revealed in the Activision trial that they expect this generation to last until 2028, so 8 years. One of the reasons this is happening is due to the slowdown of technological advancements. Chips are too complex and we're reaching the physical limits of silicon.

If it were up to you, how often should new generations be released? Mind you that I'm not talking about mid-gen refreshes, but brand new console generations.

Personally I feel like 7+ years is too much, but 5 is too little. 6 seems like the sweet spot to me.

 

[Robb]

A jump every 6-7 years is good imo.

 

[Kurotri]

I'd say 7 is pretty good but nowadays games need an entire generation to develop so I don't know anymore man..

 

[nial]

The PS2 was practically 7 years in Japan, and since then it's been the same. There is no need to change.

 

[Thick Thighs Save Lives]

7 years sounds about right.

 

[3liteDragon]

7-8

 

[hybrid_birth]

50 years. I want to play something to die for.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

12+ years. Games now take 6 years to make. Devs need a chance to learn the hardware.

 

[Celcius]

6-7 years

 

[Xtib81]

6 years is fine. No pro model in between but a pro model at launch, like smartphones.

 

[Xyphie]

Definitely phone model. Microsoft has the right approach with having a value and premium SKU which they'll hopefully just replace in the market with more powerful S2 and X2 in a year or two and organically drop software support as the market supports it. The idea of a console generation should just die when everything going forward is just going to a more powerful iteration of what we have now.

 

[ThaMonkeyClaw]

7 Years, but only if they have a mid-gen 'Pro' model, or at least offer one at launch with a much higher price, I would gladly pay a premium to of had a Pro model PS5 right at launch

 

[squarealex]

I'm a PS2 boy, so 8 years fine to me.

 

[mansoor1980]

5 years

 

[Fbh]

Maybe an unpopular opinion but I think the concept of "generations" is becoming increasingly meaningless in the age of GaaS intended to keep players engaged for years, stagnant game design and diminishing returns in regard to visuals. Can't even tell you what a "current gen game" is other than something that plays the same as a Ps4 game but with faster loading and marginally better graphics which have, in some cases, taken us back to 720p and sub 60fps performance.

I'd be fine if they just released a hardware refresh every 3-4 years and let devs decide which consoles they want to support, just put a notice on the back of the box.

 

[Sleepwalker]

6-7 years I guess is ok although I would prefer more frequent upgrades.

 

[Daneel Elijah]

5 years. Because in the PS2 era it was enough. Of course it should be more now but the question is in general not this gen in particular. I think that if you accept the idea that 1 game per generation that seems to happen often those days then the less time is "lost" in a gen the faster we can get another sequel of the best games ever, regardless of what game is considered the best. Maybe in a few generations the jumps in tech will slow down enough that it will be possible to go the phone route of 1 each year but I hope that it will be in a long time.

5 years

 

[nkarafo]

It takes about 5 years for developers to learn how to utilize the consoles full potential. So at least a few more years to see more games after that would be nice. So 7-8 years at least.

 

[Punished Miku]

7-8 years.

 

[analog_future]

With diminishing returns and cross-generational games, "generations" don't really make much sense any more. It's all iterative improvements from here on out.

So I dunno. I guess I'll just say I prefer the PC route of upgrading your own hardware whenever you deem fit.

 

[UnNamed]

I've chosen 6 years, but considering this gen it's not even started and games take too much time to make, I would say 10y to be replaced by the next console, plus 3 years together.

 

[Kenneth Haight]

Until games are forced in to 30fps, 60/1440P should be the minimum we see going forward.

 

[unlurkified]

What are these 7-8 year nonsensical answers? Do you guys not have money?! /s

For me, 6 years with a pro model half-way or 5 years without pro models. The 8-year 360/PS3 gen (2005-13) was torturously long.

 

[Captain Toad]

A console generation lasts about as long as it takes a publisher to make one AAA game.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

Games now take 4-5yrs to make. So any less than 10yrs will mean devs only ship one game per gen. So you might as well follow the PC model and give up generations at that point, because there's no longer time for devs to mature their tech for next-gen-exclusive games. It'd be cross-gen games for the first 2yrs at least. Meaning most games will be built for old-gen consoles, thus holding back new-gen.

I think we should move to 15yr gens, with a mid-gen refresh at the 7yr mark.

 

[Muffdraul]

6 is definitely the sweet spot IMO.

 

[AJUMP23]

I don't want a mid gen refresh but every 7 years is a pretty good rhythm.

 

[oji-san]

Good question.. I used to like em as long as it can be, PS3/X360 was fantastic period for me, now with the PS4 Pro and the upcoming PS5 Pro it will be 4 years, tho it's not a new gen really, but i do feel that buying a new console every 4 years, instead of previous lets say 6-7 years is something that i don't feel comfortable with, BUT.. if i want games running and looking better then there's the option i guess, it's not like the 7th gen where all we needed were 720p and 30fps and the games were flowing and no issues, today? better hardware and more issues, at least for me.. not that i'm complaining... still awesome time and some of the best.. but back then? 7-8 years and i haven't tune my TV once! all was so simple and no issues.
Anyway enough with the nostalgia.. in short.. it used to be like 6-8 years to me but now with new hardware etc it's gonna be like 4-6.

 

[Seider]

8 years with a pro model in the 4th year.

 

[Knightime_X]

Are we talking before the next console is released or how long before a console is discontinued?
Release - 6 years
Discontinued support - 10 years

As far as pro goes, just make the next console BC with last gen games being able to use new hardware.
Literally like PC.

 

[saintjules]

I'd say 7 is pretty good but nowadays games need an entire generation to develop so I don't know anymore man..

Yea, it's kind of crazy when you think about it. Imagine the games that are already in development for next-gen.

 

[Aguero9320]

Games take too long to develop now for generations to remain relevant. Consoles are just easier to use PCs now anyway, so they don't even make any sense. The whole learning the hardware thing is outdated.

 

[Fuz]

Fortythree years and seven months.

 

[cinnamonandgravy]

3-4 years ideally, 5-6 max.

console hardware gets stale so quickly.

plus if there were quicker generation cycles, we might see more hardware experimentation.

 

[YeulEmeralda]

How do you measure this? Sony as a rule supports their consoles ten years

 

[MikeM]

I think there will always be two consoles in software development going forward. Too much market to lose developing for just one.

 

[Aenima]

Minimum 6 years, but with games taking so long to develop, i would be ok with 7-8 years gens.

 

[T-Cake]

I think they call it the seven year itch when you begin to tire of someone, that someone being a something in this case.

 

[ReBurn]

New hardware every 3 years, support each model for 6 years. At the 3 year mark your top of the line model becomes pleb trash and you lose the console war. Upgrade or get left behind.

 

[Dis]

7.

Best games are on half/end of the generation? I think?

FFXV Duscae demo was my system seller for PS4 :,)

 

[Represent.]

5 years.

One game per gen. Tech moves quickly, keep it moving.

If you want more than one game per gen then go back to 8-10 hour AAA games instead of 30+ as the standard

 

[StereoVsn]

I really don't get why we need generations anymore. Just follow the PC model or mobile device model.

At some point you would exceed minimum requirements on an older console and have to upgrade. Since Sony and MS are both on x86 architecture and even Nintendo is on their ARM / Nvidia platform.

 

[Spyxos]

7-8 Years.

 

[Heimdall_Xtreme]

7 years... In this moment.

 

[Del_X]

8 years - two full dev cycles for AAA

 

[Trogdor1123]

I chose 8 but I think support should continue after for a year or 2. 7 would ok too.

I support mid gen refreshes too

 

[64bitmodels]

5-6 years! 7 is when the hardware gets stretched too thin. the last time we had a 7 year long hardware cycle we needed pro consoles to soften the blow.

That being said, this gen is taking forever to start up especially on xbox side so we might need another long haul.

 

[mortal]

7-8 years seems about right. Especially since pro models were introduced into the equation.
Long enough to let developers maximize the potential of the consoles, and for me to feel like I’m getting my money’s worth that gen.

I think people that want to be on the very cutting edge, with shorter generations should invest in a gaming PC.

 

[FoxMcChief]

8-10 years

I look forward to the generation of cloud services replacing consoles.

 

[Mr Hyde]