Is it time for a new console generation?

[Gmans uncle]

Yes, I'd say so.
I mean it's been almost 6 years into this one, and Nintendo has already unveiled the WiiU, so I predict by E3 2012 we'll see Sony and Microsoft's new stuff, and this console gen will only last one more year or so after all that comes out...

And I can get all the best titles of this console generation for pennies on the dollar and live it up with all the great stuff I hadn't gotten to play yet while everyone complains about how sucky the launch line up for all the new consoles is and how they weren't worth the 600+ dollars everyone but me wasted on them...

 

[ChaosEternal]

Filled it out. And yeah, some new consoles would be nice. The current ones are starting reaching their limits.

 

[Eggbert]

Look at the rest of my post. I said that with trepidation. It's one of those "on paper" comments.

Graphics can be better. They SHOULD be better. IF it doesn't hurt the quality of gameplay.

It's a potentially win/lose-lose/win scenario. We stick in our current graphical stagnation, but get consistent quality games. We end that stagnation with a new generation of consoles, but we run the risk of losing quality of gameplay in favor of quality of graphics.

We SHOULD be at the point where we can improve on graphics without sacrificing good gameplay. That's all I meant.

Gameplay's been in decline for years. We still don't have the same depth in gameplay as earlier games. Further, graphics are, at this point, still entirely acceptable. There is nothing wrong with the current generation of graphics, and changing everything up would slow us down as new engines are created, artists are trained in yet another set of graphics tools, even more detailed graphics are set up, and so on. In order to meet deadlines, writing and gameplay would get cut. Again.

Also, your argument implies that just because we can do something, we should do it. There is a nearly infinite number of examples where this is not the case.

Leave this generation going. If developers aren't going to produce new IP's, they'll stop making money as everyone gets tired of the same sequels. You want something new? Play something older. You'll get better gameplay out of it.

 

[Techsmart07]

Filled out your survey
I personally don't find myself even caring about a next generation of console. My wii serves as a tool for watching netflix on my TV, and that's only because running a wire from my pc over to it is too much hassle.

 

[Trull]

We don't really have generations anymore, it's gone from taking leaps to taking steps. A la WiiU and Vita

 

[tthor]

HELL no! I just paid $300 last year for my PS3, and it already does everything I want. Why would I want to pay even more right away for a marginally better console? Graphics? Graphics have already reached a high enough level that nobody gives a damn about better graphics; plus, better graphics would just mean even more difficult to program, meaning time put into graphics is taken from more important aspects like gameplay, as well as that the game will probably be more expensive. Screw. That.

 

[Sectan]

Consoles can stay put. Honestly, are these graphics THAT BAD? We're at a point now where technology should go from graphics to more efficient ways to run them so you can do bigger and better games. Instead of pumping money into graphics it can go to other places or just not be used at all. Cheaper production with possibly lower retail costs and more profit.

 

[Fusioncode9]

If the new consoles came out, I would buy them. But I'm not in any rush, there are still plenty of great games from this gen that I still haven't tried.

 

[skywolfblue]

It would be nice to have less loading screens, better physics and animations.

Current consoles are starting to show their age pretty bad. Lot of voodoo and shadow magic goes into making it look prettier then it actually is, and it shows up in glitches if you look the wrong way.

Yes, it's time. Though I can't say I'd be overeager to spend 500$ on a new console.

 

[Joccaren]

Honestly, if console games weren't holding back a lot of PC games, then I wouldn't care.

As it is, games are developed for Console then ported to PC, or at least a large number are, meaning PC gets no-where near its potential in level size, amount of content, graphical power, # of things happening at once, ect. Even BF3 and Skyrim only end up using about 20% CPU and 30% RAM on my rig, which cost me $300. Graphics I can run on BF3 Medium-High settings with a six year old card, that has cost me nothing to maintain, and looks that much better than consoles its not funny.

As to those who say 'graphics are good enough, better gameplay pls', yes, better gameplay would be nice, but it is unlikely to happen as games have already established which gameplay sells best, so you will keep getting clones of that. Some new technology would allow for different things to be done, in a wider variety of ways, and for the first part would see some innovation in the way of gameplay, at least temporarily.
As for the graphics, wrong IMO. I remember looking back at DK for the Nintendo 64, and thinking it looked amazing. I remember looking at Starwars Battlefront 2 on my PS2 and thinking it looked awesome. I remember looking at Stronghold Legends and thinking it looked good. Now, they all look... terrible IMO. Back then, graphics were also 'good enough', as we had grown used to them. With a while on far better graphics, older graphics begin to look terrible. This doesn't really stop me from enjoying the game, but it is something that's always in the back of my mind and annoying me, as I honestly prefer things like Starflight 2 where it had horrid graphics, but it looks reasonable, as opposed to those games that tried to look even semi-realistic, but by today's standards look like a joke.

Filled out that survey BTW.

 

[CrimsonBlaze]

I don't know if we need a new batch of next gen consoles (aside from Wii because they need to catch up to PS3 and 360). I really don't know what newer consoles can offer aside an improvement or solutions to some of their current features or faults.

A 360 worth buying would be nice, though, and by that I mean one that will not DIE from my brother playing online for half a day.

 

[ResonanceGames]

Developers don't want it. The first rule of making a successful console is to make developers happy. Sony and Nintendo have both learned that the hard way -- Sony with the advent of the PS3 and Nintendo with the shelf life of the Wii.

The current console gen represents the fidelity level that most developers are comfortable with. Yes, they could make games that look better, but not significantly enough to justify a whole new generation of hardware.

We've reached this weird plateau where it's not hardware that's limiting developers as much as it is development cost. Until dev tools start to catch up with things like NLEs, 3D modeling programs, and motion graphics in terms of usability and low-entry barrier, this problem probably won't go away.

There are companies like Crytek who are pushing for the next gen systems, but they're in the minority. For now, I'd give this gen AT LEAST two more years.

 

[Wolfram23]

Yes, most definitely. And hopefully Sony and MS can come to some agreement in using a standardized API so that we don't get 2 shitty and 1 decent copy of a game between PS3, Xbox, and PC. If they could just use DirectX or OpenGL it would do wonders for making games better across the board.

Also I totally disagree with anyone who thinks the graphics on consoles is "good enough". First off, the difference between 720p and 1080p alone is massive. You just get significanly crisper graphics by increasing the resolution, and the vast majority of games now can't push 1080p on current gen. Secondly, I feel like the only people who would think it's good enough are those who never game on a PC, even if it's just running a 6850 or 560 or something. I mean the simple addition of anti aliasing to console games would make them look so much better - but they just can't do it. I don't think consoles need to be graphical beasts, but I just listed 2 very easy things to add to the game that will make graphics look orders of magnitude better, and the only thing needed is better hardware. On the developer side it doesn't really change anything.

 

[boag]

The console Life cycle has always been 5-7 years.

With the PS2 being the most long lived console in the history of gaming. So while im not eager for a new console generation to start brewing up, I do think its inevitable, will probably be getting some mentions and leaks early next year.

 

[Hosker]

No, there is no need. Games are already very expensive and time consuming to make - this would increase both of those, not to mention the price. Each subsequent generation's main improvement was the graphics, which can't really be improved much now. Unless there is some significant improvement (like?) over this generation there is no point.

 

[putowtin]

not at the mo, can't think about how much they'd charge for the next gen, and I've just bought a new 360. Not to mention the whole issue of backward compatibility

 

[Erttheking]

It does feel like we've been using the current ones for awhile. Not too keen on shilling out a couple hundred dollars for a new one but,,,maybe.

 

[XT inc]

Id be willing to go in for a new console generation.

The problem is they would need to be backwards compatible, as let's face it, they've stretched this one so far along that my 360 collection is bigger than other consoles.( which is double hard because xbox 3 would need blu ray).

The whole attitude needs to change around selling the games though, devs are not creative and will ***** and moan and work together so they can have safety nets, so all the high priced turds they release don't cause an uberkill on their company when it flops.

I honestly can't imagine next gen gaming, because the industry is "so pants on head retarded" right now. 70 dollar games that nickel and dime you for an additional 80 bucks? And with the whole motion control fiasco( opening my kinect in front of my family instead of returning it, is a big regret on my end), Because no one has the balls to say, these things don't work well, at best they can be used for tertiary controls like leaning(fps's), and voice commands.

I envision say xbox 3 to have a wireless controller with a wrist strap and a better hand grip, so you can use kinect 2 in unison with a full fledge controller and voice commands.

before next gen everyone needs to cut their losses instead of doubling down on what they are doing wrong right now.