-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Would you be fine with this generation continuing for another 8 - 9 years?
- Thread starter Yoboman
- Start date
This depends almost ENTIRELY on what we the people will deem appropriate for the next next-gen in X-years. IMO 2008 will be a flowering of this generation (Wii included?) and marketing will decide what we think about the future.
I agree with John Davison about how the Wii will be a "twice as bright, half as long" sort of life cycle and that the PS3 will be successfull for many years, the 360 on the other hand is a massive non-clusterluck IMO and Microsoft will probably attempt to harmoniously bring in the next 'box in 2009 after they (hopefully) get their shit together hardware-wise.
I agree with John Davison about how the Wii will be a "twice as bright, half as long" sort of life cycle and that the PS3 will be successfull for many years, the 360 on the other hand is a massive non-clusterluck IMO and Microsoft will probably attempt to harmoniously bring in the next 'box in 2009 after they (hopefully) get their shit together hardware-wise.
MrTroubleMaker
Member
no
Better hardware gives Dev's more "freedom" to do more with the games. 10 years is to long though. I don't know a good time length either. These things are costing too much for many people, so ....??? I don't know.
True, but not everyone is made of money. At least with the PC you can get away with upgrading some hardware parts and most games are " back compatible" with older hardware. Consoles are a whole different story. It would help if new games would "work" ,degraded of course, on older consoles and "newer" consoles had great BC...
Better hardware gives Dev's more "freedom" to do more with the games. 10 years is to long though. I don't know a good time length either. These things are costing too much for many people, so ....??? I don't know.
gregor7777 said:
True, but not everyone is made of money. At least with the PC you can get away with upgrading some hardware parts and most games are " back compatible" with older hardware. Consoles are a whole different story. It would help if new games would "work" ,degraded of course, on older consoles and "newer" consoles had great BC...
fortified_concept
Banned
Looking at games like Uncharted and GT5 and knowing that much better graphics are definately achievable I don't think more power is needed, they're already almost perfect so for the next 7-8 years I'm set.
Wii is another story of course.
Wii is another story of course.
tinfoilhatman
all of my posts are my avatar
sorry but no, not even close 5 years is just right.
macksplack
Member
No,
There 3 years left for 360 maybe 4 but that is tops.
For ps3 there is 4 years left maybe 5 tops.
There 3 years left for 360 maybe 4 but that is tops.
For ps3 there is 4 years left maybe 5 tops.
RevenantKioku
PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS oh god i am drowning in them
Considering I still regularly play SNES games, most definitely.
Forgotten Ancient
Banned
Hell no.
Unless next gen starts at $999 or requires me to get another TV that's 2160p or some shit. The PC is already starting to pull away from what we're seeing on consoles. In 3 years, the 360 and even PS3 will start to be very disappointing in comparison.
The Wii? I hope it only last 2-3 more years before Nintendo releases a WiiHD that's at least on par with the 360/PS3. I doubt that'll happen, but it doesn't mean I have to be happy with that realization.
If it goes through another revision or two, the PSP is probably the only system I think could hold up for 8-9 years. With firmware updates and a huge technological advantage over its competitor, it's the definition of future proof - if the software starts showing up, that is. I'm going to want a DS2 before I want a PSP2.
Unless next gen starts at $999 or requires me to get another TV that's 2160p or some shit. The PC is already starting to pull away from what we're seeing on consoles. In 3 years, the 360 and even PS3 will start to be very disappointing in comparison.
The Wii? I hope it only last 2-3 more years before Nintendo releases a WiiHD that's at least on par with the 360/PS3. I doubt that'll happen, but it doesn't mean I have to be happy with that realization.
If it goes through another revision or two, the PSP is probably the only system I think could hold up for 8-9 years. With firmware updates and a huge technological advantage over its competitor, it's the definition of future proof - if the software starts showing up, that is. I'm going to want a DS2 before I want a PSP2.
TerryLee81
Member
No, I like new hardware.
But I wish we would get great games earlier, it took a long time for the 360 and it's the same for the PS3.
But I wish we would get great games earlier, it took a long time for the 360 and it's the same for the PS3.
Im hoping the next generation of consoles gives people the processing power to try out new things like procedurally generated movement of characters so that they walk/attack/whatever more naturally. It would also be cool to see quality built-in tools for cloth/ragdoll physics and other details like that so that people can focus on their gameplay and AI.
What would be really cool would be procedurally generated voice acting so that if you dont like the voice acting you could read a few lines into a microphone and it would adjust the voice to sound like you or you could download new voice styles for different characters or something, kinda like putting your own face and music into the game. That would be a good use of processing power. Maybe.
What would be really cool would be procedurally generated voice acting so that if you dont like the voice acting you could read a few lines into a microphone and it would adjust the voice to sound like you or you could download new voice styles for different characters or something, kinda like putting your own face and music into the game. That would be a good use of processing power. Maybe.
MrSardonic
The nerdiest nerd of all the nerds in nerdland
No, because the change in interface technology is going to accelerate in a similar manner to how graphics technology did previously.
Graphics will always get better but I think more and more time/money is going to be spent on researching, and bringing to market, more intuitive and advanced controllers/interfaces. Wii/DS have opened that door and Nintendo are obviously already working on taking those concepts to the next level with their next consoles.
I'd also argue that photo-realistic graphics are not as important as devoting processing power to things such as fluid animation, 60fps, multiple on screen characters/movements/occurrences, improving AI, increasing user interaction with the game-world. If these things could be achieved with Wii+ level graphics they would still provide an improved gaming experience. As the interface becomes more important and allows for greater interaction, surely the priorities in software development will also shift.
I think that because Nintendo have managed to make their console hardware profitable immediately it also reduces the importance of having long hardware cycles. Longer cycles are preferable when you have expensive hardware that you make a loss on for the first few years (at best). When you profit at every stage and on every commodity related to your business (i.e. hardware, software, peripherals) it is much less risky to introduce new products within 5 years of the release of a previous product.
Graphics will always get better but I think more and more time/money is going to be spent on researching, and bringing to market, more intuitive and advanced controllers/interfaces. Wii/DS have opened that door and Nintendo are obviously already working on taking those concepts to the next level with their next consoles.
I'd also argue that photo-realistic graphics are not as important as devoting processing power to things such as fluid animation, 60fps, multiple on screen characters/movements/occurrences, improving AI, increasing user interaction with the game-world. If these things could be achieved with Wii+ level graphics they would still provide an improved gaming experience. As the interface becomes more important and allows for greater interaction, surely the priorities in software development will also shift.
I think that because Nintendo have managed to make their console hardware profitable immediately it also reduces the importance of having long hardware cycles. Longer cycles are preferable when you have expensive hardware that you make a loss on for the first few years (at best). When you profit at every stage and on every commodity related to your business (i.e. hardware, software, peripherals) it is much less risky to introduce new products within 5 years of the release of a previous product.
I'd be very happy, you see in my opinion when companies kill off their systems just when the developers know the hardware very well. Imagine you spend ages learning how ride a bike and once you finally learn it someone shows up and says "Bikes are played out, here is a skateboard, master it".
And damn it stop defending Bungie & it's 640p, guess what Bungie are not the best at everything live with it. Last time I checked the Soul Calibur team working on IV are going to use HDR. have a framerate of 60FPS and were considering 1080p support.
So in order to get HDR on Halo 3 the team had to drop the resolution from 720p to 640p, have some average character models & have a framerate that can't even keep up at a rock solid 30FPS.
Why the hell can't developers even hit a 30FPS, I thought this was next-gen. Call of Duty 4 is going to put many games to shame when it's released.
And damn it stop defending Bungie & it's 640p, guess what Bungie are not the best at everything live with it. Last time I checked the Soul Calibur team working on IV are going to use HDR. have a framerate of 60FPS and were considering 1080p support.
So in order to get HDR on Halo 3 the team had to drop the resolution from 720p to 640p, have some average character models & have a framerate that can't even keep up at a rock solid 30FPS.
Why the hell can't developers even hit a 30FPS, I thought this was next-gen. Call of Duty 4 is going to put many games to shame when it's released.
Xav said:
Why bother making the comparison when the scope of games aren't really compatible yes bungie could've done better but that's a bad example. HDR isn't always the same in terms of implementation especially when you consider various aspects.
As for the op topic no I'm interested in seeing this generation play out for these console sure devs can do a bit more but with ram and fillrate limitations the sooner they can get over the hd requirement hurdle the better.
Beer Monkey
Member
Remember how Half-Life 2 looked embarassingly bad on the Xbox compared to the PC?
We'll be back at that point in just a couple of years. Graphics, but also physics and AI, have tons and tons of room for improvement, and it's going to need new hardware.
I'm sure somebody will have a true next generation console out by 2010 or 2011 and I eagerly await it.
We'll be back at that point in just a couple of years. Graphics, but also physics and AI, have tons and tons of room for improvement, and it's going to need new hardware.
I'm sure somebody will have a true next generation console out by 2010 or 2011 and I eagerly await it.
Nope. I think four to five years is the sweet spot.
I'm going to live for sixty, perhaps seventy more years if current trends continue. There's a lot I want to experience in that time; but from a gaming perspective I'll be surprised if we haven't achieved photorealistic graphics, true to life interactive environments and could-be-human AI in the next fifteen years. That's to say nothing of the leaps I expect to be made in display and user interface technology. Looking even further ahead, I won't be truly satisfied as a gamer until I've experienced some form of total sensory immersion VR in my lifetime.
There are so many levels of game design that lie just out of reach due to the constraints of current technology, and I want to see developers attain as many of them as possible while I'm still here to benefit. That's the beauty of this art form - creativity can be expressed in utterly novel ways as developers gain new tools over a relatively short period of time. Exploit the new tech for five years, then give me a new box and a new wealth of possibilities.
I'm going to live for sixty, perhaps seventy more years if current trends continue. There's a lot I want to experience in that time; but from a gaming perspective I'll be surprised if we haven't achieved photorealistic graphics, true to life interactive environments and could-be-human AI in the next fifteen years. That's to say nothing of the leaps I expect to be made in display and user interface technology. Looking even further ahead, I won't be truly satisfied as a gamer until I've experienced some form of total sensory immersion VR in my lifetime.
There are so many levels of game design that lie just out of reach due to the constraints of current technology, and I want to see developers attain as many of them as possible while I'm still here to benefit. That's the beauty of this art form - creativity can be expressed in utterly novel ways as developers gain new tools over a relatively short period of time. Exploit the new tech for five years, then give me a new box and a new wealth of possibilities.
UpperCaseN
Member
no way, 6 years max
Quite funny to see so many people voice their opinion about wanting a new generation, yet when it comes time to discuss the merits of PC gaming all you hear is "TOO EXPENSIVE!!"
You all felt the price when it came time for 360/PS3 launches, just imagine what it will be like when these consoles have to start churning out the same output of power that a souped up PC will bring.
I for one prefer this gaming generation to last as long as possible. Graphics are excellent on all three consoles depending on the game you look at - why exactly are you people wanting more?
You all felt the price when it came time for 360/PS3 launches, just imagine what it will be like when these consoles have to start churning out the same output of power that a souped up PC will bring.
I for one prefer this gaming generation to last as long as possible. Graphics are excellent on all three consoles depending on the game you look at - why exactly are you people wanting more?
Cheesemeister
Member
The video game market is extremely cyclical. I'd bet a week-long ban that Nintendo's next generation home console after Wii will officially launch in the US on Sunday, November 20th, 2011. Any takers?
I think the limitations are more software based now than hardware.
The amount of time its takes it takes to do Hi-Res art work is staggering. Not to mention the budget of the games these days. Having an even more powerful system will take gaming budgets to ridiculous heights.
Obviously Nintendo has already figured this out, and MS and Sony are thinking twice about releasing new tech that they cant even fully support. Programmers haven't even figured out how to take advantage of multi-core processors yet.
Without a doubt this gen will last longer. Its far too costly to move on any faster.
The amount of time its takes it takes to do Hi-Res art work is staggering. Not to mention the budget of the games these days. Having an even more powerful system will take gaming budgets to ridiculous heights.
Obviously Nintendo has already figured this out, and MS and Sony are thinking twice about releasing new tech that they cant even fully support. Programmers haven't even figured out how to take advantage of multi-core processors yet.
Without a doubt this gen will last longer. Its far too costly to move on any faster.
No - consoles will need another hardware upgrade in 2 to 3 years to keep up with the PC. Consoles are already starting to show their limitations compared to some of the newer PC titles - Crysis for example. In a couple of years the difference will be huge. I would much rather buy another $500 console than have to build a $2,500 PC gaming rig.
It would be best to let the next consoles percolate for atleast a year longer than it took to get to this gen from the last one. Of course that'd be possible now that Nintendo does not have a Gamecube on their hands and Microsoft doesn't have an Xbox 180 on their hands and Sega is 3rd party.
But ofcourse Iwata will mercilessly brutalize all things in his path and release a Wii sequel which will result in desperate actions from both Sony and Microsoft. By that point gaming will become so mainstream we will hate ourselves for letting it become what we hated most about ourselves and wish we could be back in the golden age of 2007-2009.
But ofcourse Iwata will mercilessly brutalize all things in his path and release a Wii sequel which will result in desperate actions from both Sony and Microsoft. By that point gaming will become so mainstream we will hate ourselves for letting it become what we hated most about ourselves and wish we could be back in the golden age of 2007-2009.
I know what you are saying, but to be fair - PC gaming is a lot more expensive.speedpop said:
Example:
I built a PC this summer (midrange) for around 500 pounds all together. It's a decent platform for expanding (good motherboard, decent PSU etc.). But in order to play the latest games this Christmas the way they are intended I would have to upgrade my graphics card to DX10 one. In a year from now I will probably need more RAM and a new CPU because 2 gig and an E6420 probably aren't good enough anymore. In 2 years I'll need a new Graphics card again. All in all probably another 500 pounds spent and that makes approx. 1000 pounds for a machine that will play the latest games decently for around 4 years.
I spent 280 quid on 360 that does the same (if not at the same quality) for 5 or 6 years.
Dark Octave
Banned
Why anybody would want to hold back technology is beyond me. I say no. We need to keep it moving.
frankie_baby said:
It took enormous amounts of processing, but I think I found out what this Wii fanboy was trying to say.
Translation:
The Wii still has potential left. The games show graphics equal to the gamecube and don't use any of the extra power. SSBB and SMG are coming out soon and are examples of this untapped power. Factor5 and the other graphic whore developers will improve the 360 and PS3 graphics, but it doesn't matter because their low system sales. MS will have to rethink its approach, and Sony will quit.
The next consoles will appear in 2011, but like the Wii, will be the same systems with slightly higher clock speed and more memory. They will also try to innovate like Nintendo, while Nintendo will finally have a system with comparable power. Also, I believe that a new version of the Wiimote will more immersive.
speedpop said:
If this generation does actually continue for the next eight years - which I don't think it will, really - do you actually think anyone here will really care? I mean, if the games are there for their system of choice, who gives a shit?
Dark Octave said:
Skyrocketing game budgets, needlessly disrupting all the marketshare you've gained in the past generation, participating in a bullshit technological arms race just to appeal to the 5% of the population who can tell you what 8xAA means, the fear of having to take a loss on expensive hardware early on, R&D is expensive...
NO.
this generation saw the SMALLEST leap over a previous gen, and I am not talking about Wii, I mean with Xbox 360 and PS3.
Probably for the first time ever , current-gen console's (X360, PS3) graphical performance started out BEHIND that of high-end PCs. that's just an absolute fact, not an opinion.
DC, PS2, GCN, Xbox were all ahead of highend PC graphics at least for a while.
Saturn, PS1, N64 were also ahead of highend PCs for a time.
I'm expecting the first of the NEXT gen of consoles in 3, maybe 4 years.
clearacell
Member
The last generation (besides PS2) seemed to have been cut short, especially since HDTV adoption rates are still too low to utilize HD-ready consoles. Many people can't tell the difference between this gen and last gen because they're looking at the PS3 and 360 games on their crappy 19 inch SDTV's. Maybe this gen should last 2 more years than all the previous ones.
I just hope next time they try to push the bleeding edge a bit more. I know this goes contrary to common wisdom (just like the Wii did), but I actually wouldn't mind paying around $750 for a console provided that it gave competent media capabilities (which most consoles do now), novel, varied, and quality control schemes (a natural evolution on what the Wii has done); and absolute top-of-the-line tech in every respect.
There is no excuse for consoles not to be able to, e.g., run Crysis on decent settings right now, it would definitely be worth the premium to many, many people. But companies clearly feel constrained by this silly "consoles must be less than $600!!11" paradigm. Give consumers the total package, give them quality build, and give them almost future-proof awe-inspiring tech and they will respond in droves.
There is no excuse for consoles not to be able to, e.g., run Crysis on decent settings right now, it would definitely be worth the premium to many, many people. But companies clearly feel constrained by this silly "consoles must be less than $600!!11" paradigm. Give consumers the total package, give them quality build, and give them almost future-proof awe-inspiring tech and they will respond in droves.
camineet said:
Again, isn't that more of an indicator of diminishing returns than "HEY THIS GENERATION SCREWED US OVER I WANT A NEW ONE?"
AstroLad said:
And gaming becomes more upper-class and elitist than it already was just so we can have a "complete package."
Hooray!
AstroLad said:
Why not just get a PC then? What you are describing is a PC next to your TV.
Anyway, I like long console generations. 6-7 years is a sweet spot IMO.
I think we will see the HD consoles get updates at 2012 (and a 50% chance MS isn't in next generation), and the Wii gets an update in 2010. I am pulling these predictions out of my arse of course.
jmdajr said:
I think - hope - that console gaming will progress without killing off the previous generation. I'd be more than happy for current gen games to be made for the next twenty years, as budgets decrease and further exploitation of the hardware becomes more simple and less expensive. But that doesn't preclude new, backwards compatible hardware hitting the market; initially seeing a very limited amount of high quality next gen software as the economics catch up to the technology.
Similar threads
- Poll